For Elite Colleges, Standardized Tests Should Be More Important in Admissions Decisions Then GPA

Re: Introduction Yes, we are discussing what colleges should do, rather than currently do. But since I am arguing that the way they currently do things is the way they should do things, what they currently do is relevant to this discussion. "There is absolutely no way to know what elite colleges actually consider important because that information is typically not release to the public (in much the same way a company would not release it's hiring policies to the public.)" Actually, that information is released to the public. They are vague, because they rely on subjective evaluation rather than some formula, but they still state what they consider important. "The single most important document in the application is the high school transcript. We look for students who have consistently taken a broad range of challenging courses throughout their high school careers. There are no score cut-offs for standardized tests: the median scores of admitted students on the verbal and mathematical portions of the SAT generally fall in the mid 700s, and ACT composites in the low 30s, but successful applicants present a wide range of test results. While there is no hard and fast rule, it is safe to say that performance is relatively more important than testing. A very strong performance in a demanding college preparatory program may compensate for modest standardized test scores, but it is unlikely that high standardized test scores will persuade the Admissions Committee to disregard an undistinguished secondary school record." -Yale "Because we believe it is the best forecast of what kind of Brown student you will be, what you have done as a high school student will have the most influence on our admission decision. In that regard, the transcript showing your courses and your performance in them is a key source of information, but no single part of the application can tell a complete story." -Brown "Also, we are talking about only whether GPA (a number) should have more of role than SAT score (a number)." Are we? Well then your argument that GPA (the number) should play a smaller role in admissions and SAT should play a larger role is logically invalid, since the actual GPA number has no role in college admissions. How could it be relevant? Different high schools use different GPA systems; there are 4, 5, even 15 point scales, as well as 100 point scales rather than a traditional GPA number. Not only that, but some high schools weight honors or AP classes when calculating GPA's, and some do not. Some schools grade classes on different scales (100-90=A, 89-80=B, etc. vs. 100-93=A, 92-86=B). And if we aren't talking about the raw number, then we must be talking about what colleges actually look at: grades in the context of the high school and the classes. If you are arguing against elite colleges using the numerical GPA, out of context, then you are arguing against a straw man, since they don't actually do that. Re: Argument 1. So, you're saying that the rarity of the score increases exponentially according to the bell curve. And that for admissions at elite colleges, chances of admission increase exponentially as the score increases. I didn't know that this was the case, but it seems fair enough. In this debate, I am defending this, the status quo, and it seems from your post that you also think that this treatment of test scores is reasonable. I fail to see the argument that test scores should play a greater role in college admissions in this part of your post. Re: Argument 2. You argue that colleges should use SAT subject tests to compare students taking the same class at different schools. Well, that is what they currently do. That's why most elite colleges require or strongly recommend SAT subject tests. I think that the role they currently play is just fine, and they should not be more relevant. SAT subject tests scores represent a students ability to do a laughably easy 1 hour multiple choice test. Grades in classes reflect labs, essays, problem sets, etc. In some cases, yes, SAT subject scores/AP scores may be a better indicator of mastery of a subject. However, mastery of a specific subject has little to do with success in college, especially at elite colleges. Many elite colleges don't even give credit for AP scores, or only give credit for a couple classes. They do so because the material tested for on the AP test is so different from the material of actual college classes at elite colleges. These elite colleges rightly see that mastery of irrelevant material should play a limited role in admissions. Instead, they look for how well you did in the classes that were available to you. Getting top grades generally takes effort. The best way to predict whether or not students will put forth the effort to do well in their college classes is to look at how hard they worked in high school. If they get all A's or almost all A's, it shows colleges that they are willing to work hard. If a student isn't willing to work hard enough to get A's in high school classes, how can a college know that they are going to do well in college classes that require much more work? Re: Argument 3. Here you say that a typical student qualified to study at MIT should have no problem with their AP Calculus class. I agree. Therefore, getting less than an A in a simple high school math class should be looked down upon in elite college admissions. But what about the AP test score? There are two problems with giving it greater relevance. One, a student may simply get a low score because they were sick, or having a bad day or something on the test day. Someone is unlikely to have this problem over an entire semester, making an evaluation based on grades less susceptible to random chance. Two, a student may not be able, because of school rules or the classes available to him/her or some other thing beyond the student's control, to take AP Calculus and similar classes before their senior year. Since AP test scores come in July, it would be impossible to use scores from tests taken senior year in admissions. However, grades, in the form of mid-year reports, can be used in admissions. Those who score well on things such as the AMC and AIME already do get a boost in elite college admissions. For example, International Math Olympiad contestants can get into pretty much any college they want. I completely agree that elite colleges should continue to use the scores on these test in admissions. Re: Conclusion 1.Here, you state that "Grades don't achieve any of these goals. All they do is tell us how well a student did in a class. For elite colleges, the answer is almost uniformly 'very well' so no distinction is made between students." 2.And that since tests are "capable of of objectively measuring a student's knowledge, reasoning, and problem solving skills" and "extremely fair to all individuals," so they should be given greater weight in admissions. 3.If you accept 1, then since students uniformly get top grades and no distinction is made among them, then you logically cannot be arguing for grades to be given less weight in admissions, since virtually no distinction among all of the top students is made. 4.Looking at 2, you argue that tests should be weighted more in admissions. But because of 3, you cannot be arguing that test scores should get more weight in admissions at the expense of grades. 5.Since you are arguing that test scores should get more weight in admissions, but not that grades should get less weight, logically, you must be arguing that test scores be given more weight at the expense of other factors such as extracurriculars. Therefore, since your thesis is that test scores should be given more weight in admissions at the expense of grades, this section is, logically, irrelevant to the discussion. Sources: https://collegeadmissions.uchicago.edu... http://www.yale.edu... http://www.b...