The SAT and ACT are Coming Back to MIT

[LDAHL]

I see standardized test scores will once again be considered in admissions decisions at MIT, bucking a popular trend among elite schools. Apparently the essays about how you overcame your fear of pencils or that time your parents funded that two weeks you spent washing goats in Malawi turned out to be poor predictors of academic performance.

I think that’s probably a good thing. Fewer dropouts with massive debt demanding barbers and truck drivers bail them out.

[bae]

MIT is a full-need institution, students do not end up with loans.

https://sfs.mit.edu/undergraduate-students/the-cost-of-attendance/making-mit-affordable/

[Tybee]

My brother had perfect SAT scores and went to MIT. He has not had an illustrious work life, by any means, and has not saved anything, and gets pretty minimal social security.

Don't think the correlation you are looking for really exists.

[LDAHL]

MIT is a full-need institution, students do not end up with loans.

https://sfs.mit.edu/undergraduate-students/the-cost-of-attendance/making-mit-affordable/

That’s good news. They’ll be able to afford transferring to Oberlin.

[LDAHL]

My brother had perfect SAT scores and went to MIT. He has not had an illustrious work life, by any means, and has not saved anything, and gets pretty minimal social security.

Don't think the correlation you are looking for really exists.

Yes, but he was able to finish MIT. Training only serves you well if you possess other success factors.

[jp1]

I didn't aspire to an elite educational institution so I didn't put any particular effort into my SATs beyond showing up. I still managed to score a 1310 because I'm reasonably intelligent and was a diligent student and had the luxury of going to decent schools. By choosing a middle of the road private university (that had a good music school and at the time an outstanding football team.)* I was able to use that score to get a half tuition scholarship since the school was trying to up their academic credibility at the time and "paying" people with scores well above the school's average to attend was probably an effective way of doing that.

But I tend to agree with LDAHL. My career success isn't because I got that degree. It's because I've always applied the same attitude of "do the job completely and as competently as I can without stressing myself out" attitude that I did with the SAT to every paying job I've had since leaving academia. Honestly the American obsession with great SAT scores leading to college degrees seems misplaced or at least unnecessary. My current employer's CEO never went to college. He's lived in England his entire life where a university education is not a requirement for many careers. After high school he entered into a commercial insurance underwriting apprenticeship at our employer where he paid attention and did good work. 30 years later he had climbed the ladder to the point of running the company, which he has been successfully doing for over 10 years now.

*Only one of those is still particularly notable today.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I gave little thought to the SAT. I took it as it was expected. I did as well as I could, as I usually do on tests, but didn't stress that much more over it than any other test (even those ones the government gave just to access grade level achievements in general), just a big test, I couldn't tell you my SAT score as I don't know. Probably good in reading, and okayish but nothing spectacular in math, as far as I can remember. I didn't go to very good schools, tried to get B's (A's and I'd just be called a nerd) so had like a 3.2 or 3.3 GPA. I found high school and being a teenager miserable and it was mostly about surviving it, thriving wasn't going to happen. It was about getting out alive. :)


My career success isn't because I got that degree. It's because I've always applied the same attitude of "do the job completely and as competently as I can without stressing myself out" attitude that I did with the SAT to every paying job I've had since leaving academia.

Maybe that's what everyone does realistically except a few near unemployable sorts. But some people get stressed out easier or less easy and so on. And people focus on different areas of competence even in the same job (like someone may make sure all i's get dotted, and someone else be more creative etc.).

[bae]

But I tend to agree with LDAHL. My career success isn't because I got that degree.

No employer ever even asked me even if I'd graduated from college, or what my degree was in, until well after I was "retired" and was doing the background check paperwork for one of my current jobs.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I was even ridiculed by a potential employer for my lack of educational credentials in an interview. Wft, I was just looking for a job, they don't have to hire someone, but why treat them like @#$# just for interviewing (meanwhile this person's degree was not even in the field they were working in). And anyway if that's such a show stopper maybe they should actually read people's resumes before scheduling an interview >8).

Yea job searching is: :0! :0! :0!

(I went to college for awhile, family pushed me to go to the community college among colleges and I did. My SAT scores and grades while not the best of the best, probably could have gotten me into much better colleges than anyone ever told me or occurred to me to apply for. I tried 4 year state college later, but dropped out eager to join the real world (I didn't have bad grades I was just restless and eager for adulthood and didn't know what I wanted anyway). A few years later in between jobs, I went back and took a few extra courses to complete a 2 year degree but that's it. Altogether meh on a resume for the education part. I just hope the work experience gets an interview).

[jp1]

No employer ever even asked me even if I'd graduated from college, or what my degree was in, until well after I was "retired" and was doing the background check paperwork for one of my current jobs.

Every employer I’ve had has asked if I had A degree. None have asked where it was from or what it was for or what my grades were until after I’d been offered the job and they were in the ‘background check’ phase of the process.

[Teacher Terry]

I definitely think it’s a good idea. During my career you needed specific degrees to work in the field. So without that you wouldn’t get a interview.

[justin.klug]

I see standardized test scores will once again be considered in admissions decisions at MIT, bucking a popular trend among elite schools. Apparently the essays about how you overcame your fear of pencils or that time your parents funded that two weeks you spent washing goats in Malawi turned out to be poor predictors of academic performance.

I think that’s probably a good thing. Fewer dropouts with massive debt demanding barbers and truck drivers bail them out.

I'm gonna be a freshman next year, luckily my school still doesn't require us to take the the SAT or ACT. I'm not sure how that affects scholarships and stuff but they offer so many different scholarships other than standardized tests. https://www.iw.edu/financial-assistance/. I'm not sure what do.

[Teacher Terry]

Testing accounts for 60% of one’s abilities and the other 40% is motivation which if you could test for would be priceless.

[San Onofre Guy]

Colleges that did away with the SAT dumbed down their student body. This seemed to start as state schools with this idea to make things equal to enroll. Those with test anxiety or the “bias” of the test would still have a spot. Many also stated that if you were in the top certain percentile of your high school you automatically get accepted. I for one believe that an education is better overall when you are with a cross section of society and that State University provides a more well rounded education than Ivy League. Hard science I do believe that MIT and Caltech rule the roost. Princeton, Stanford, Harvard, Yale and Columbia also have an edge for the top brains. After those seven and there are likely a few more, but less than 20, there is little discernible difference from the perceived lowly state or private and the top. It is all a marketing game. I actually think most students should go to Community College for two years and finish year 3 and 4 at University. They would certainly save a lot of money