"It is wise to be skeptical about the claims made by high-priced coaches and coaching companies. Although commercial coaching courses—those that focus on drills, tricks, and memorization techniques—often advertise huge score gains, students should know that recent research demonstrates that coached students are only slightly more likely to have large score gains than uncoached students."
And..
"...research shows that coached students are only slightly more likely to have large score gains than uncoached students."
However, according to InsideHigherEd...
"Wayne Camara, vice president for research and analysis of the College Board, described research that recently found that coaching — even short-term coaching — does have a major impact on those with poor writing skills."
Thus, it is very easy to reason...that students with access to tutors or coaches =
students with money, have an advantage over those who do not.This is great news for those in the education business - tutors, test prep guide writers, and so on.
Questions: Is it possible to level the playing field with standardized testing? Is standardized testing a viable way to determine students' academic ability at all?
It doesn't seem so.
What do you think?
Next SAT test...December. Late registration until Nov. 14th. Don't hurry.
.jpg)
The VP's admission that the SAT is in fact coachable is nothing new. Still, it's good to finally hear it from the organization which has thrown out the Scholastic Aptitude Test acronym. The coachability is only one of the many flaws of the SAT. Maybe it's time for some government-mandated test to emerge and replace the "not-for-profit" organization which has been reaping millions off students forced into taking the test.
http://web.mac.com/jiri.sklenar/iWeb/AP/Welcome.html
Posted by: David Sklenar | November 14, 2006 11:52 PM | Permalink to Comment