Get important education news and analysis delivered straight to your inbox
As schools and testing centers shut down in spring 2020, it seemed only fair for colleges and universities to suspend ACT and SAT admissions requirements. A pandemic is as good a reason as any to change the rules.
Three years later, and months after the Covid-19 national emergency was declared over, 80 percent of colleges and universities are still following “test-optional” protocols. This trend has generally been celebrated by critics of the tests, who argue that the exams are inherently unfair due to the disproportionately large share of high scores among affluent test takers. However, in practice, the test-optional system is far more exclusionary than mandatory testing requirements ever were.
As the number of students applying to college has been increasing each year since 2019, college admittance is more competitive now than ever. Students with access to college counselors and test tutors (read: wealthier students) know this, and many are still using ACT and SAT exams to stand out.
Students with access to test tutors are aware that the eye of the admissions needle has narrowed, and they are being coached to use their test scores to thread it. As an SAT/ACT tutor in New York City for a tutoring company that charges over $200 an hour, I have worked with multiple students who are encouraged to retest even after scoring in the upper 1500s on the SAT or above a 34 on the ACT. Their parents can afford to deliver them that extra boost.
Related: PROOF POINTS: Research on increasing diversity in college admissions
Meanwhile, with admission tests voluntary, low-income students tend to opt out. In its 2022 SAT annual report, the College Board reported that students from families earning less than $67,083 annually made up only 27 percent of test takers who reported their family income. Six years earlier, while tests were still mandatory for most college applications, students from families earning less than $60,001 made up a far-larger share: 43 percent of test takers. While the percentage of low-income test takers has radically fallen off, the opposite is true for wealthy students: In 2022, 57 percent of test takers who reported their families’ earnings were from households earning $83,766 or more. This is a jump from 46 percent of student test takers whose families earned $80,001 or more in 2016.
While teaching high school English at a Title III public school in Northern California after the SAT/ACT requirements had just been lifted in 2020, I noticed the morning prep period dedicated to SAT administration was known around campus as a great day to sleep in. There was little to no test prep offered to students, either.
Today, many of the students I tutor are brought to me via partnerships with some of New York City’s most elite and expensive private schools. They are prioritizing test prep as a method of differentiating their students in an overly competitive admissions field.
The glaringly unfair aspect of “test-optional” guidelines is that wealthy students know it’s a meaningless distinction; lower-income students with less access to college counselors, however, do not.
The biggest question here in terms of equity is whether colleges are following through on their pledges to deprioritize test scores in admissions. Are colleges being true to their word and not weighing test scores as highly as other metrics? Or are these tests more significant than schools are letting on?
It turns out that the “test-optional” stamp on most College Board applications may be extremely misleading. A 2019 pre-pandemic survey (the most exact available) reported in the National Association for College Admission Counseling State of College Admissions found that 83 percent of colleges considered admission test scores to be of “considerable” or “moderate” importance. This was only a hair shy of the 90 percent of schools that considered grades influential toward admittance, and significantly higher than the 56 percent of universities that considered writing samples important. While the post-pandemic test-optional guidelines may have diminished the relevance of scores, the question is whether or not that diminished relevancy is more policy than practice.
The bottom line is: Colleges are looking at ACT and SAT scores. Opting out of the tests in a “requirement-free” admissions process could be the difference between denial or admission to a dream school. It could alter student scholarship opportunities as well.
The 2022 acceptance rate at Fordham University was 63 percent among students who submitted scores, compared with 49 percent among those who did not. Similarly, Boston College’s 2022 incoming class recorded an acceptance rate of 25 percent among those who submitted scores and 10 percent among students who did not. This admittance discrepancy holds true for other big name schools, including Barnard, the University of Virginia, Georgia Tech, Amherst, and many more. The glaringly unfair aspect of test-optional guidelines is that wealthy students know it’s a meaningless distinction; lower-income students with less access to college counselors, however, do not.
The percentage of students taking the SAT from high-income families jumped from 46 percent in 2016 to 57 percent in 2022.
The test-optional system is in dire need of restructuring. In order to promote true equity, schools should completely eliminate SAT/ACT scores from the college application process. There’s precedent: As of 2021, none of the University of California schools accept or even consider score reports of any kind. If all universities were to follow suit, it would level the playing field by negating the expenses of tests, tutors and studying time.
Unfortunately, many schools are moving in the opposite direction. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a school focused on science and mathematics, will once again require test scores beginning in fall 2023. The university administration argues that test scores help predict students’ success at MIT and aid the school in identifying promising students who may not have had access in high school to advanced coursework or other enrichment opportunities.
While I disagree with this decision, it is still more equitable than labelling test scores “optional.” At least in the case of MIT, all students will be aware of the requirement and can at least attempt to study accordingly. The deceptively exclusionary message of “test-optional,” however, is often only correctly deciphered by expensive tutors and guidance counselors.
Disregarding test scores and requiring them are both far more transparent than the current system at many schools. With the Supreme Court affirmative action decision injecting some chaos into the college application process, it’s important for colleges to be as straightforward with applicants as possible. The misleading “test-optional” label only complicates the path to college for many low-income students.
Maggie Bigelow is a former public high school teacher and current MFA nonfiction writing candidate at Columbia University.
This story about test-optional admissions was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s newsletter.
A comment made by a student frustrated by problems in administration of the LSAT.
Thousands of students trying to take the Law School Admission Test remotely were thwarted Friday and Saturday by problems with the proctoring service the Law School Admission Council used for the first time this year.
Exactly how many of the roughly 8,000 students who had chosen to take the August administration of the Law School Admission Test online were affected remained unclear Sunday, said Mark Murray, public affairs liaison for the Law School Admission Council.
“But we deeply, deeply regret and apologize for any test taker who was affected by the problems over the last two days,” he said. “It doesn’t matter whether the problems started with us or our proctoring vendor; it’s our responsibility to deliver the test in a way that lets every student do their best work, and for far, far, far too many people, that did not happen this weekend.”
Statements like that came too late and probably offered too little consolation to the furious test takers who in some cases waited hours for online proctors to show up or languished on hold with the law school council or Prometric, the proctoring company, seeking help.
This was Prometric’s first administration of the LSAT since the law school council decided in April to reinstate in-person testing alongside the remote option it had exclusively offered since the COVID-19 pandemic. The council switched from its previous proctoring company, ProctorU (now known as Meazure Learning), to Prometric because the latter was better positioned to oversee both in-person and online testing, Murray said.
Despite what Murray characterized as “many months” working with Prometric conducting “large-scale tests” to “make sure their systems and procedures were all ready” for the August administration of the LSAT, “a mix of staffing and systems issues” combined to “create much bigger problems” that “didn’t surface during our planning,” he said.
The problems began early in the day on Friday, snowballed as more and more test takers started their tests on a rolling basis through the day, and continued into Saturday.
In social media posts on X (formerly known as Twitter) and on the r/LSAT thread on Reddit, in addition to emails to reporters, test takers described long wait times waiting for test administrators or proctors, significant technical problems and deep frustration. A few sample comments:
- “Test time was 10:30, currently 1:15. At first I couldn’t get past the screen that said ‘A Proctor will be with you shortly,’ but after a hour or so it started bypassing that screen and connecting me with a proctor. But it wasn’t a proctor. It was me. They put me on a video call with myself.”
- “I truly cannot get past this weekend. I cannot focus on anything other than what should have been. I am devastated. My anxiety is driving up the wall. I scored a 174 on a previous PT. I was so ready, I logged in a substantial amount of time early and was excited to get started. This test was my only opportunity to do my absolute best before the upcoming admissions cycle.”
- “Prometric support was nowhere to be found for any student. LSAC was overwhelmed with student calls and complaints. It was complete chaos, and LSAC was publicly radio silent, with the exception of one tweet, until almost 10 hours after the issues began (when it became clear that this issue had to be affecting thousands of test takers).”
Murray said LSAC and Prometric worked hard to correct the problems, and attributed its delays in getting word out to test takers to being focused on addressing the problems and not wanting to put out flawed information.
“But we can absolutely understand why test takers and their families would feel like they weren’t hearing enough, and quickly enough,” he said.
LSAC is taking several steps to “make it right for every August test taker,” whether they successfully completed the test or not, Murray said.
Any student who feels as if their “performance was affected” can fill out a complaint form that is linked to their personal account with the council, and “anyone whose test session was affected” will have several options, Murray said: retaking the test on two new administrations added on August 19 or 20, either remotely or in-person; shifting from the August administration of the test to any other testing slot in the 2023-24 testing year; or keeping their score. Students who retake the test on one of the August makeup dates will get their LSAT scores at the same time as those who took this weekend’s test successfully.
Those steps may not satisfy all test takers, if this post on Reddit is any indication.
The LSAC is “focused on making sure that nothing like this can ever happen in the future,” Murray said. “We take this very seriously. We know how important this test is to students, how hard they prepare for it, how much time and effort and blood, sweat and tears they put into it, and we’re committed to making it right.”
He said it was premature to say whether Prometric would stay as the company’s proctoring solution.
Summary
Indian Institute of Management Lucknow is conducting the Common Admission Test 2023 (CAT 2023)
The applicants are requested to register well in advance to have a hassle-free registration process and to avoid last-minute rush
Indian Institute of Management Lucknow is conducting the Common Admission Test 2023 (CAT 2023). The last date to complete the registration is 13th September 2023 at 5:00 pm. The applicants are requested to register well in advance to have a hassle-free registration process and to avoid last-minute rush. The test is scheduled to be held on November 26, 2023 in three sessions. In case of any queries, candidates can check the website - iimcat.ac.in or reach out to the help desk at 18002108720.
Eligibility Criteria:
Candidates applying for CAT 2023 should fulfil any one of the following conditions:
- Completed Bachelor’s degree with the required percentage of marks.
- Completed professional degree (CA/CS/ICWA/Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries of India (FIAI)) with required percentage of marks.
- Should be in the final year of Bachelor’s degree with required percentage of marks.
- (For General, EWS and NC-OBC candidates, the minimum percentage of marks required is 50%. And SC/ST/PwD candidates should have a minimum 45%.)
For new registration, candidates must follow the link and complete the steps required.
Exam Centres:
CAT 2023 will host its examination in about 155 cities, allowing candidates the choice to select six preferred cities for their test venue. The CAT Centre will make every effort to ensure candidates receive one of their preferred options, but if a particular region witnesses high demand, the organising body reserves the right to assign a centre near any of the preferred choices. Once a centre is allotted, candidates are not permitted to request any changes.
Results & Admission Process:
The CAT results are likely to be declared by the second week of January 2024. The CAT 2023 score will be valid only till December 31, 2024 and will accordingly be accessible on the website. Candidates must note that their performance in the CAT 2023 examination is an important component for consideration in the selection process. IIMs may also use the previous academic performance of the candidates, relevant work experience and other similar inputs in short-listing of candidates at various stages of the selection process. It is important to note that the candidates must declare and maintain a valid and unique email account and a mobile phone number throughout the selection process.
Last updated on 22 Aug 2023
Colleges and universities wanting to commit to health and education equity without using affirmative action can turn to the UC Davis School of Medicine for best practices, according to a new article published this week in JAMA online.
The "Viewpoint" article posted Monday recaps how and why the school, over nearly two decades, has significantly boosted enrollment of students historically underrepresented in medical education. The article was authored by School of Medicine faculty members Mark Henderson, associate dean for admissions; Tonya Fancher, associate dean for workforce innovation and education quality improvement; and Susan Murin, the interim dean.
The article, "Holistic Admissions at UC Davis—Journey Toward Equity," was written after the U.S. Supreme Court barred higher education institutions from admitting students based on race. Although California voters narrowly passed Proposition 209, banning race-conscious admissions in 1996, the UC Davis School of Medicine has stood out as one of few institutions that has steadily increased enrollment of Black, Latino and Native American students.
Over the past 15 years, the article states, UC Davis School of Medicine "has tripled enrollment of these students by developing an admissions model that prioritizes state workforce needs and attention to the mission fit, lived experience, and socioeconomic background of each applicant."
In 2006, the proportion of entering Black, Hispanic and Native American students was less than 10%, despite the same groups being a majority of the state's high school graduates. It was also known that students from these groups experience greater income equality, less access to care and poorer health outcomes.
"To fulfill the school's public mission," the article states, "radical change was needed—but without preference for race, sex, color, or ethnic or national origin in the admissions process."
That's when the school's leadership team committed to developing a process to admit students who would be best equipped to meet the workforce needs of California. This represented a new, radical model for medical education.
It meant relying less on metrics—such as the Medical College Admission Test scores, or undergraduate grade-point averages—and adding a number of other criteria to provide a more holistic view of each applicant's life experience. The admissions committee also added new student and faculty members and implemented new methods of evaluating applicants, such as multiple mini-interviews that are less subject to individual bias and are better at predicting who will make a great doctor.
"Asking the question, 'How will this applicant add to or strengthen the future physician workforce in California?' broadened the perspective of committee members, prompting them to consider attributes including maturity, work experience, military service, and personal illness, disability, or other adversity," the authors state.
Even after employing the new criteria, committee members needed ways to put traditional academic metrics into the context of the diverse educational experiences and opportunities of students from different backgrounds. Eventually, researchers from the UC Davis Health's Department of Family and Community Medicine developed the Davis Scale. It is a continuous measure of socioeconomic disadvantage, incorporating factors from the medical school application such as parental income and education, growing up in a medically underserved area, and other socioeconomic variables.
"This scale is placed alongside other academic performance measures to provide context to these metrics, serving as a proxy for resilience or distance traveled, key physician attributes," the article states.
Meanwhile, the school developed innovative pathways or Community Health Scholar (CHS) tracks that helped students align their medical education with workforce needs. They did this with the help of the UC Office of the President, state funding and financial support from organizations such as Kaiser Permanente Northern California.
For example, ACE-PC (Accelerated Competency-based Education in Primary Care) is a three-year program that offers a medical degree to select students in just three years instead of four, helping alleviate the shortage of primary care physicians. Likewise, REACH PRIME (Reimagining Education to Advance central California Health) provides students with extensive patient-care experience the Central Valley, which has a severe shortage of physicians.
Students who pursue CHS pathways often mirror the target patient population or specific workforce need the program intends to address. And because students from historically underrepresented groups often come from low-resource families, including many who are the first in their families to attend college, the school offers a strong support system that includes financial aid, academic coaches and mentors.
"UC Davis' mission-aligned holistic admissions journey shows that institutions committed to education and health equity can make progress in a race-neutral environment," the authors conclude. "Leveling the playing field for low-income students can reduce segregation of medical schools, enhance the impact of scientific teams, grow the primary care workforce, Boost access to care for underserved communities, and increase provision of culturally humble care. All medical schools must recommit to their social mission if the U.S. is to achieve health equity."
More information: Mark C. Henderson et al, Holistic Admissions at UC Davis—Journey Toward Equity, JAMA (2023). DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.15872
Citation: New article recounts a medical school's holistic admissions practices (2023, August 16) retrieved 23 August 2023 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-08-article-recounts-medical-school-holistic.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
With the first ACT and SAT exams less than a month away, prep experts are working to help get students better scores.
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — The ACT and SAT exams are tests that high school students might get a bit nervous about.
The new school year began for many the week of August 14— and the first ACT and SAT exams are already less than a month away on September 9.
According to test prep experts, preparation begins early for many.
Young minds can already be found hard at work prepping for the ACT and SAT at both Huntington Learning Center and Academic Advantage.
"We either deliver the student a practice test, or we'll look at their existing test scores and we'll write a customized plan to address the areas of the test where they need to see growth, making sure that all of our students are ready for the test,” described David White, CEO at Academic Advantage.
As the first tests of the school year inch closer, numbers at Huntington Learning Center have been increasing.
"Most of our students are targeting the September 9 test, and then there's another one in October. So at this point in time, we're constantly enrolling students," said LeAnna Kelpine, Director at Huntington Learning Center.
The ACT and SAT generally cover the same topics— measuring what a student already knows.
“These are not tests of a student's intelligence,” White said. “They are tests of a student's knowledge of specific academic skills.”
He added that there's one test in particular that Arkansas students typically focus on.
"The ACT is usually the most common test taken in Arkansas,” White explained. That's due in large part to the fact that that's also the test that's administered in our Arkansas public schools."
A student can put all their eggs into one basket, but it's up to them on which test they want to focus their energy on.
“The students enrolled that are taking the SAT, many of those are wanting to attend a college in the Northeast [or] Northwest that requires an SAT,” Kelpine said.
She added that the main purpose of these exams, and a student prepping for them, is to get a good score for college admissions.
“Some of them need to increase their scores enough to basically not take remedial classes in college, others are targeting the perfect score,” Kelpine explained.
White targets at least a four-point gain from the start of prep, but has seen up to 10 points! He said there is a sweet spot that leads to less burden for college tuition.
“Targeting a 32 on your ACT, because that will get you the Governor's Distinguished Scholarship,” he said.
The big question is, how can students achieve success— and the answer is prep.
“Practice tests are probably one of the most essential things that a person can do to get ready for the ACT or SAT,” White said.
The tips and tricks for doing well, on top of practice exams, are all about the foundation.
White advised students to get comfortable with their calculators and learn math formulas, especially since they aren’t provided on the exams.
Also, students should remember grammar rules. Both White and Kelpine agreed that being an avid reader before high school can get a student far.
“You can't decide this week that you're going to go run a marathon next week, you've got to start Getting ready for that well in advance,” White said. “If parents will work with their students, and really begin even in sixth and seventh grade, laying those foundations and helping them develop those fundamental studying skills, the payoff can be incredible by the time they get to the test.”
Kelpine echoed this sentiment.
“It's not just about rate or fluency, it's about comprehension,” Kelpine said.
She added that a tip and trick for the day of the test includes getting the brain active as soon as possible.
“Get there early, read something, work a math problem get your brain functioning,” she said.
This is because White said the test is both physically and mentally taxing.
“There are described few times in a child's education that we say sit down and take a test for four hours,” he said. “That's hard on your body that's hard on your attention span.”
At the end of the day, a good score comes with practice.
“All they have to do is be willing to take the time and to put forth the effort,” White said.
Both Academic Advantage and Huntington Learning Center have options for families who are interested in learning about the cost of their students preparing for the ACT or SAT.
