Skip to comments.Revised SAT Won’t Include Obscure Vocabulary Words
Posted on 04/16/2014 5:18:01 AM PDT by reaganaut1
The College Board on Wednesday will release many details of its revised SAT, including sample questions and explanations of the research, goals and specifications behind them.
We are committed to a clear and open SAT, and today is the first step in that commitment, said Cyndie Schmeiser, the College Boards chief of assessment, in a conference call on Monday, previewing the changes to be introduced in the spring of 2016.
She said the 211-page test specifications and supporting materials being shared publicly include everything a student needs to know to walk into that test and not be surprised.
The overall scoring will return to the old 1600 scales, based on a top score of 800 in reading and math.A New SAT Aims to Realign With SchoolworkMARCH 5, 2014 David Coleman is focusing on ways to encourage low-income students to go to select colleges.The Story Behind the SAT OverhaulMARCH 6, 2014 One big change is in the vocabulary questions, which will no longer include obscure words. Instead, the focus will be on what the College Board calls high utility words that appear in many contexts, in many disciplines often with shifting meanings and they will be tested in context. For example, a question based on a passage about an artist who vacated from a tradition of landscape painting, asks whether it would be better to substitute the word evacuated, departed or retired, or to leave the sentence unchanged. (The right answer is departed.)
The test will last three hours, with another 50 minutes for an optional essay in which students will be asked to analyze a text and how the author builds an argument.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Nice. Lemme see. What do you call a 4-legged, furry animal that says ‘Meow’? I got it — cat!!! C-A-T!!!
I’m a jeenyus!!! Give me a gubbermint job!!!!
Nothing like dumbing-down tests to make ya feel smarter!
“What fo dat woord?”
This thread is pedantic. (Google it)
They can use different words—but math is still math.
This jejune thread is enervating.
Obscure words are fine for masters and doctoral theses, specialized technical writing, and specific legal terms.
As a person who has handled analyses of millions of dollars worth of assets, the key in writing an understandable report is to write at a 12 year old level. Words of 3 syllables or less unless absolutely necessary. Words that clearly state the findings and meanings you are trying to convey.
The extreme use of obscure legal terms, for example, has led to the requirement that contracts be written in common language.
The change in requirements do not reflect a ‘dumbing down’ of the test. Rather a reflection of what an individual will typically use in 98% of their college life.
(used to be a college test prepper) Those “obscure words” are fair if they’re presented in context and the student has to ascertain their meaning from that. They’re fair in analogies if roots, prefixes and suffixes make it reasonable to figure out their meaning. But multiple choice lists for the meaning?....it does disadvantage students whose language skills did not originate in very erudite environments.
No, math is not still math under “common core.” Now there are “friendly numbers” !!!
I refuse to engage in blatant sesquipedalianism.
Some would call that obtuse.
The purpose of a high standard is to differentiate the levels of acquired intelligence and achievement so that selective schools can identify the very best students among the merely competent ones. Inclusion of some obscure words helped to set those truly superior students apart in fields where language mastery is valued. Thanks to politically correct pressure, the SAT will soon measure only a level of functional competence in language, with excellence ignored and therefore eventually discouraged. When those who are average demand and get higher scores that they do not merit, the system has been dumbed down. An average society despises and punishes merit.
“This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put!” - attributed to Winston Churchill
Fact is, a Japanese kid in an American school does better than a Japanese kid in a school in Japan. Same thing for any ethnic group you can name, except for a particular ethnic group that cannot be named.
Since that ethnic group has an average IQ of 85, it is impossible to raise their scores. In the name of "equality" however, it is possible to cripple the high-achievers and drag their scores down.
It's not fair that some people are more successful than others, you see.
This thread is esoteric and nebulous.
When I was 12, I was reading at college level, or so the tests told me. I don't remember much from sixth grade, but I do recall my class read "The Count of Monte Cristo". That was a challenge.
Back then, in the 60s, California public schools were very good.
All I have to say is thank God I went to school and college at a time when there were still some standards and actual measures of achievement and knowledge.
I would caution you against using that word around Warden Norton. It brought a very negative reaction from him in the context that it was said.
College has become a very expensive piece of paper proving that you passed high school twice.
What's this tread got to do with astronomy?
Ummm...wait a sec...I was thinking of nebula...never mind.
Will words like twerk or selfie be included?
I’ll bet not one test-taker in a hundred could correctly state the actual meaning of either “prejudice” or “discrimination”
“what white people do”
Arrant pedantry, up with which I shall not put!
Is that esoteric enough?
That's true on average for the world, but not true in the U.S.
Americans are the best educated population in the world. About 85% of Americans graduate from high school and most Americans enter collage. It's no wonder that the American worker is by far the world's most productive. Sure, lots of folks (even on these threads) love to bash America, Americans, and American education, but like it or not America is simply exceptional.
Now you’re just being abstruse.
As always, it really depends on what they mean by obscure. I’ve seen words come up at spelling bees that would choke a person with multiple PHds in latin, nuclear biological physics, psychology, English lit, and history.
There’s obscure and there’s OBSCURE.
The vocabulary words from the old SATs are not legal or technical terms. Some are mere pedantry, the thing you throw into an essay to win points from a certain kind of grader. Others are evocative, precise, and necessary for a rich literature.
I love to use an uncommon word when it is the perfect, precise word, but I learned decades ago to keep those words out of ordinary conversation or documents. Still, if I have the right conversational partner, or I am writing fiction, and one of those words is the RIGHT word, I will use it. And if I am reading or hearing Shakespeare I want a chance to decipher the words that he invented (incarnadine). Even Twain will throw a word in that requires a dictionary (philopena.) I would have to contrive a situation to use that word, but I regard Mr. Twain with gratitude nevertheless.
To take away the old vocabulary is both an attempt to reduce the SAT’s function as a de facto IQ test, and a further step away from the ideal of a college education in the liberal arts (that is, those arts that a free man should know, and leading to independent thinking) and towards the idea of an education serving the needs of business and government.
BTW, a requirement for common language in contracts does not preclude an unreadable number of pages.
and this is why liberalism exists... to punish excellence and artificially prop up the weak.
They already stripped most of the tough vocabulary out of the SAT when they took out the analogies.
This apparently is just removing the remaining scraps.
I’d argue that above average kids from whatever country are the ones who tend to make it over here.
But I agree with your larger point.
The autoschediastic nature of this change will deturpate the SAT.
Enough so that Aristophanes likely got his ass kicked whi;e partying at the Temple of Knossos in Crete.
Yep, I remember topping out with 16th-grade scores pretty much across the board on achievement tests when I was in 5th and 6th grades. Has ever made me skeptical of education when I read about students reading at grade level or, gulp, below.
"First of all, we must internalize the 'flatulation' of the matter by transmitting the effervescence of the 'Indianisian' proximity in order to further segregate the crux of my venereal infection. Now, if I may retain my liquids here for one moment. I'd like to continue the 'redundance' of my quote, unquote 'intestinal tract', you see because to preclude on the issue of world domination would only circumvent - excuse me, circumcise the revelation that reflects the 'Afro-disiatic' symptoms which now perpetrates the Jheri Curis activation. Allow me to expose my colon once again. The ramification inflicted on the incision placed within the Fallopian cavities serves to be holistic taken from the Latin word 'jalapeno'."
Quit making fecal matter, bitte. Sie machen meinen Kopf verletzt bist.
It “disadvantages” students who don’t know as much as others, which is the point of the test.
Your comment was stultifying.
Math is not math anymore. This is real.
“Colbert also highlighted a Common Core second grade problem that has become popular among parents on social media:
Mike saw 17 blue cars and 25 green cars at the toy store. How many cars did he see? Write a number sentence with a [grey box] for the missing number. Explain how the number sentence shows the problem.
And theres hard proof that the Common Core is already opening our childrens minds to new ways of thinking, Colbert continued. Just look at this actual answer to that question given by a California second-grader.
17 + 25 = 42 I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer that my brain got.
Folks, this child has a bright future, quipped Colbert. Hes only in second grade and can already clearly explain what it feels like to think. Now we just need to get him to explain what that feels like to whoever wrote the Common Core question.
¿Porque el examen no se escrita en espanol? ¡Racista!
Sorry; that post is slightly above the 12 year old level. Can dial it back a bit?
Funny that you would say that, my three children echo that same complaint about me.
Your point of view is what’s wrong with education: we produce “graduates” that are juuuuust smart enough to do their tasks, but not so smart (or well informed, or disciplined with critical thinking skills) that they’ll start asking unwanted questions. A servile education, as opposed to what used to be the gold standard of liberal education.
Now, you can schedule the exam during every month, and from what I've heard, there are no essay questions.
It may have been harder for some, but those essay questions pulled me over the finish line. I had the same professor for over 30 hours of accounting, and he never used numbers...he only taught theory.
His tests (midterm and finals) were all essay, and out of the five questions he would ask, the first sentence of the answer to at least two questions would be "based on the information you've given me, I cannot answer the question." From there, you would have to discuss the accounting theory behind the problem.
As I recall, the application of the thought processes I honed during college (at a Jesuit university) did not endear me to several officers in my chain of command...lol!