NABC just proposed that SAT and ACT requirements be permanently eliminated from NCAA initial-eligibility standards

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Ldavid]

“Student athletes”

 

[CuseFaninVT]

“Student athletes”

My son is a HS junior. We're in the middle of this right now. There is a strong likelihood that few colleges will actually require either test for admission for regular students in the next couple years. Why should student athletes be subject to requirements involving standardized testing that regular students aren't?

 

[dan7800]

A lot of schools, including mine are doing away with these tests as entrance criteria. Expect them to be history in the next 5 years anyways.

 

[cuse10]

Going to be more kids admitted who wouldn't pass the NCAA Clearinghouse with the abolition of the exams. That's not a good thing either especially if they were struggling with high school level work. The burden on them is going to be greater at the college level where there is little to no hand holding depending on who your instructor is.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Going to be more kids admitted who wouldn't pass the NCAA Clearinghouse with the abolition of the exams. That's not a good thing either especially if they were struggling with high school level work. The burden on them is going to be greater at the college level where there is little to no hand holding depending on who your instructor is.

Wait, are you actually saying the basketball players will have little to no hand holding for their coursework?

 

[cuse10]

Wait, are you actually saying the basketball players will have little to no hand holding for their coursework?

I'm not making a generalization towards any specific program. I'm just saying, the kids who were already at risk are going to be even more so in an environment where they may not be able to cut it. If no one is on top of them to account for their shortcomings in the classroom, you run the risk of eligibility issues.

 

[Briancuse]

A lot of schools, including mine are doing away with these tests as entrance criteria. Expect them to be history in the next 5 years anyways.

Wish they were when I was in HS, its a sham, not a true indicator of intelligence, some people don't test well.

 

[dan7800]

Wish they were when I was in HS, its a sham, not a true indicator of intelligence, some people don't test well.

That's not the real reason why it is being ditched by colleges, but I agree with you.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Wish they were when I was in HS, its a sham, not a true indicator of intelligence, some people don't test well.

I was lazy in HS but tested really well, so those things put me over the top on college admissions. Different times though.

 

[Brooky03]

Why are these tests bad?

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I'm not making a generalization towards any specific program. I'm just saying, the kids who were already at risk are going to be even more so in an environment where they may not be able to cut it. If no one is on top of them to account for their shortcomings in the classroom, you run the risk of eligibility issues.

In general, I believe players have far greater access to assistance than general students. You may be right, but I'm hopeful the coaching staffs will stay on top of the kids, as you mention.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Why are these tests bad?

Because if you're rich you can pay someone to take them for you.

 

[Eric15]

Why are these tests bad?

They're not necessarily bad per se, it's just that there's not a good argument for mandating that all students take them. SAT/ACT scores are strongly correlated with parental income. Kids whose parents have the resources to enroll them in SAT prep courses, take the PSAT, etc. naturally perform better. And then there have been a number of cases of flat-out fraud, e.g. Operation Varsity Blues.

A number of schools have transitioned to "test-optional" systems where students can choose what tests, if any, they want to include on their resume, such as AP tests, etc.

“Academic performance, as well as retention and graduation rates are almost identical when comparing test submitters and non-submitters, despite substantial differences in test scores (we collect them after admission is granted for research purposes), and despite the fact that test-optional students tend to be lower-income and from families where parents are not college-educated."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/03/19/is-it-finally-time-get-rid-sat-act-college-admissions-tests/

 

[Briancuse]

Why are these tests bad?

1. Some people don't test well

2. The test is geared at two subjects. If your not strong in Math your screwed.

 

[721Comstock]

Wish they were when I was in HS, its a sham, not a true indicator of intelligence, some people don't test well.

Translation - *somebody* got a crappy score on their SAT’s.

 

[Briancuse]

Translation - *somebody* got a crappy score on their SAT’s.

I mean I did I barely broke 1000.

 

[Brooky03]

I mean I did I barely broke 1000.

Everybody, Briancuse is a dumb

 

[Eric15]

If I remember correctly Zack Morris got 1502, Jessie Spano got 1205, and AC Slater got 1050. Not sure if that's helpful to anything.

 

[MSOrange]

If I remember correctly Zack Morris got 1502, Jessie Spano got 1205, and AC Slater got 1050. Not sure if that's helpful to anything.

Yep Jessie sure didn't get into Stanford with that kind of score.

 

[dan7800]

I mean I did I barely broke 1000.

I'm surprised you even got a positive score

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Tough crowd.

Everybody, Briancuse is a dumb

I'm surprised you even got a positive score

 

[dan7800]

Tough crowd.

Shut up nerd

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Wish they were when I was in HS, its a sham, not a true indicator of intelligence, some people don't test well.

It is not supposed to be an indicator of intelligence, but rather an predictor of the ability to succeed in college.

 

[Briancuse]

If I remember correctly Zack Morris got 1502, Jessie Spano got 1205, and AC Slater got 1050. Not sure if that's helpful to anything.

They never revealed Screechs score that always bothered me.