By: THE DUDE (529 posts) - 7/28/2015 2:33:31 AM

One can go months if not years between GW getting nationwide ink, but we sure did Monday.  As such, as we await for more hoops news, seems worthwhile to note:

http://time.com/3974083/george-washington-sat-act/http:

//www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/george-washington-university-admissions-tests_55b6a068e4b0224d88337325

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/07/27/george_washington_university_drops_sat_act_test_admissions_requirement.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/colleges-are-dropping-the-sat-2015-7

By: Bigfan (2,829 posts) - 7/28/2015 2:41:51 AM

Great idea to drop the only independent, standardized measure of knowledge, in which all can compete. Sure they both have flaws, but grades are very subjective.

 

By: Maine Colonial (487 posts) - 7/28/2015 7:08:47 AM

This is just one exampte but now that GW has taken over the Corcoran College of Art and it's become part of Columbian College, I think the administration wants to encourage potential art students to consider GW. I would guess a significant number of them have really strong art portfolios and art grades but weaker test scores and we don't want to discourage them from considering GW. By making the submission of standardized test scores optional, you encourage more applications helping your yield rate without hurting the middle 50% SAT/ACT scores range. Sounds smart to me. Athletes will still have to submit their SAT scores to make sure they meet NCAA standards.

By: Maine Colonial (487 posts) - 7/28/2015 8:18:29 AM

A sign of the times: The story has garnered 660 Comments most of them from haters/racists while the Post's GTown University track racism/sexual misconduct investigation story is at 28 Comments and the GW Basketball Vietnam Memorial story has garnered 4 Comments.

By: Double Edged Hatchet (1 posts) - 7/28/2015 9:03:26 AM

And in case you were wondering...here's a list of other schools: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/07/27/a-list-of-180-ranked-schools-that-dont-require-act-or-sat-scores-for-admissions/

By: notta hater (2,492 posts) - 7/28/2015 10:28:52 AM

having recently placed two kids in college -- the SAT and ACT became a lot more about how often it was practiced and how often it was taken. Super scoring has minimized their significance IMO (the notion that you can take and retake a "test" seemed odd to me). The quality of schools that my kids got into with my son opting-in mostly and my daughter opting-out a fair amount did not suggest that the SAT/ACT added anything to the process. They both got dinged at safetly and reach schools and got admitted into safety and reach schools. I truly think it was the body of work, a good transcript, good activities, leadership positions, volunteer/service oriented activities, a good essay and strong recommendations. The thing that may have helped the most, however, was the relationship between the college and the HS. The SAT and ACT I determined is simply a racket to squeeze money from HS kids and their parents. Kudos to GW for being ahead of the curve on this.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 7/28/2015 11:16:23 AM

This raises an interesting question. How will the NCAA react? Right now you have a combination grade/score scale for eligibility. So even though GW isn't requiring the tests, the scholarship athletes will still need to take them until the NCAA no longer requires them for eligibility.

By: The Dude (529 posts) - 7/28/2015 2:03:13 PM

Bo, I can't imagine the NCAA will ever do away with the standardized test admissions piece.  Otherwise, it would really be open season for bogus schools and bogus grades.  At least now, even with the bogus schools you need to get a certain SAT score, or if you are Coach Cal players, find someone who can pass it for you.

 As for GW taking away the requirement, I'm a bit torn.  I tend to agree with BigFan, I'd prefer some standardized, non subjective, aspect to the application process.  As anyone who attended our Law School can attest the LSAT is about 2/3 of getting in, that's probably too much weight, but now zero weight to SAT/ACT for undergrad admissions? Seems problematic. 

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 7/28/2015 2:13:43 PM

Dude you are probably right for the next few years. However, if a critical mass of schools do away with testing, it will be hard for the NCAA to say that testing is an appropriate benchmark for eligibility since the member schools have rejected it. We are not there yet but if it becomes the rule rather than the exception you will likely see some changes at the NCAA level.

By: GW Alum Abroad (2,456 posts) - 7/28/2015 2:59:24 PM

Mo Rice, anyone? 

 Doing away with the standardized tests will help diversity in admissions, though as long as the tuition price tag is as high as it is the major hurdle will not be tackled. I was one whose h.s. GPA was not great but scored very hign on SAT's, mainly because the busy work needed to get good grades bored me (and I took the SAT once and did not do a prep course).  But I found the test a poor measure of scholastic aptitude and an even poorer one of intellectual capacity. And that was back when we still used #2 pencils to do math equations in class! (Yes, I am an old fart!). 

As for athletic elligibility and the SAT, it won't go away any time soon but it stopped being legit a long time ago (as Tark, John Chaney and U$C football all proved long ago).

By: Poog (3,875 posts) - 7/28/2015 4:20:01 PM

Reminds me of the old days when our grades were Honors, High Pass, Pass and Fail. Grades were out of sync with grad schools so GW gradually changed to more definitive (meaningful?) gradations of +/- and numericals. GW, the first school to enroll a GI Bill student and one of many to banish ROTC during the 60's/70's is now a gold standard for collegiate veterans with a basketball team currently gaining national praise for its serious jaunts to the Vietnam Memorial (that infamous wall of meaningful reflection so vehemently decried when its plans and construction first became public). Times change. Attitudes evolve. Bob Chernak proved prophetic. As he said during Omargate - GW can admit anyone they want. Not sure grades from disparate high schools or standardized tests that money can be thrown at to improve scores are predictive or disqualifying. Good luck to the GW admissions folks and the U.S. News gurus with their bizarre college ranking lists. Hopefully Nero, Lonergan, Tsipis, Ault, Ritchie, Coyne, Munoz, Foster-Cunningham, Schramm, Jones et al will still be able to integrate their SAT/ACT bound student-athlete recruits with their entrance-test free fellow students.

By: Bigfan (2,829 posts) - 7/28/2015 4:36:41 PM

There is overreliance on testing in general.

Remember with the offspring, the schools were also all about these AP subject tests. And as Notta pointed out, stellar test scores didn't necessarily make a difference, at various levels.

College admissions is a totally pressure-filled subjective and mysterious thing today, compared to our era, when we basically had to have a decent record, just a few interests or accomplishments, fill out the form and send in the application check.

Nonethess, unfortunately, the one of mine who applied, got into GW, against my wishes and wallet (and anyone else who isn't named Bill Gates), given that there were siblings involved who would have gotten in as well, and well over $100,000 year starts to become real money, but that's another story.

Feel that there should be some form of standardized testing that could fairly level the playing, certainly better than what there is now with the SAT anyway.

But was hoping it would at least help recruiting for those of us schools who have academic standards for athletes.

Turns out it doesn't.

By: The MV (4,915 posts) - 7/28/2015 5:12:24 PM

No easy answer here.  I can't stand the "test anxiety" argument for making standardized testing optional.  Someone who is very smart but doesn't "test well" shouldn't be coddled which I see as one ramification of no longer making either test mandatory.  My non-medicated children had to compete academically against lots of children who were prescribed with ADD medication to improve attention span and focus.  Did all of these kids actually have ADD?  Hardly (though some legitimately did and I do not mean to be dismissive of their needs). Was this fair to my children?  Probably not, but that's the way it was and they had no choice but to deal with reality.   Of course, the other primary reason deals with cultural bias, and capable disadvantaged students not even applying to GW due to their scores.  I'd just have to believe that there would be a better way to encourage these students to apply and show more leniency with their scores than doing away with the test altogether.  However, maybe there isn't, leading us to yesterday's decision. 

Top Transfers Sitting Out Next Season

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2451008-ranking-the-best-college-basketball-players-sitting-out-the-2015-16-season/page/11 (Includes Kethan Savage)

READ MORE

GW, THE FUTURE OF THE PROGRAM, AN ACCOUNTING AND A LOOK AHEAD

As a fairly new reader and poster of this esteemed board, its impossible to not detect an air of defeatism among some of the loyal and thoughtful writers. 1) Any highly successful coach will just .... 2) We can't ever land a legit top recruit 3)

READ MORE