There are very good reasons declines in NAEP scores aren't correlated with performance on college admissions tests.
About a decade ago, the college admissions world was surprised by the emergence of a new standardized test, an alternative to the SAT and ACT . Developed by Jeremy Tate , an education entrepreneur and former teacher who had been vocal in criticizing the SAT and ACT as failing to reflect the values of classical education and privileging technical skills and data analysis over moral reasoning and engagement with classical texts, the Classic Learning Test assesses reading comprehension on passages from Great Books and eschews contemporary nonfiction, journalism, and social science readings.
Over 300 colleges now accept the CLT including many faith-based and Christian institutions. Not surprisingly, many home-schooled students are voting with their feet.op-ed co-authored by Tate and a CLT colleague. Because the CLT’s argument confuses correlation with causation and inference with evidence.Tate’s argument goes something like this: if high school students’ average performance in English and math has declined significantly over the past decade on one test , but scores on a different test have remained relatively stable, the only plausible explanation is that the latter test has gotten easier.To begin with, the design and purpose of the NAEP differs from college readiness exams like the SAT and ACT. They measure different sets of content in different ways, for different purposes. While NAEP seeks to compare average student achievement state-by-state and over time, the SAT is supposed to predict higher education readiness and success. Expecting the outcomes to track perfectly is like insisting that bicycles and motorcycles should get riders to the same destination at the same speed because they both have two wheels. Fundamentally, NAEP is a low-stakes assessment administered to a statistically representative sample of all U.S. students. In contrast, SAT, ACT and AP exams are high-stakes tests taken disproportionately by college-bound students. AP tests are entirely voluntary, as are the ACT and SAT in about half of U.S. states that don’t require one of the tests for high school graduation. Comparing trends across these exams without accounting for self-selection is a category error.Yes, NAEP scores have declined since 2015. But these declines are heavily concentrated among lower- and middle-performing students. Scores among students at the top of the NAEP distribution have remained relatively stable. In fact, the average NAEP score in 12Tate makes the case that the consistent proportion of students earning a 1400 or higher on the SAT doesn’t jibe with the fall in NAEP scores. Tate argues that “only one conclusion is viable: the exams changed”. But a 1400 SAT score puts students well into theor higher on that test. So the NAEP scores for that higher-performing student population squarely support the College Board’s claims. The 90CLT’s argument also ignores participation and preparation effects entirely. Expanded access to AP coursework, stronger alignment with school curricula and the growth of test preparation can all raise performance among test-takers without regard to exam difficulty. In fact, it would be exceptionally difficult for the SAT and ACT to become easier. Since not every student answers the same questions, standardized tests are equated psychometrically to ensure they’re comparable from one test form to the next and year-over-year. This ensures that score scales remain comparable over time. Tate’s commentary instead conflates population-level decline with performance among a selective, higher-achieving subset of students , and then treats this mismatch as evidence of test manipulation. This conclusion does not survive even the most elementary assessment science . One would hope it also falls short of the CLT’s own benchmark for logical reasoning. Rather than throwing stones, Tate and the growing number of states flirting with the CLT might want to focus on the Iowa Board of Regents’, one of the only independent reviews of the exam. The board concluded there is currently no evidence that the CLT predicts college readiness, the very outcome it claims to measure. Nor is there evidence that it predicts college performance, retention or graduation.The backdrop here is worth noting. Tate’s head-scratching claim came in response to a College Board commentary, itself responding to an opinion piece asserting that the SAT and AP exams have been dumbed down in recent years. Whatever one thinks of the College Board, responding to that debate with methodologically unsound reasoning does the CLT no favors, especially as states consider adopting it as an alternative measure of readiness.
SAT ACT College Admissions Assessments NAEP Jeremy Tate Wall Street Journal College Board
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
USC Women’s Basketball Faces Defining Five-Game Big Ten TestAs the USC Trojans look to recover from their three-game losing streak, they now enter a season-defining Big Ten guantlet as they are set to face four ranked opponents in their next five games.
Read more »
Timothy Busfield Allegedly Passed Lie Detector Test After ArrestTimothy Busfield’s lawyer alleges the actor passed an independent polygraph test after his arrest, continuing to deny the child sexual abuse charges
Read more »
Challenging winds test Indy DPW as they battle this round of winter weatherContact Maci:
Read more »
'Minneapolis Is the Test Case': Trump Threatens Insurrection Act to Put Down ProtestsBrad Reed is a staff writer for Common Dreams.
Read more »
10 Spy Thriller Shows To Watch if You Love Peacock's 'The Copenhagen Test'Simu Liu and Melissa Barrera in The Copenhagen Test
Read more »
Bitcoin (BTC) Price Analysis for January 14Will the growth of Bitcoin (BTC) lead to a test of the $100,000 zone soon?
Read more »