If a tree falls in the forest...
Fun factoid of the day: Neither the ACT nor the College Board/ETS (giver of the SAT) tells colleges or universities why they cancel student scores. Joe Shmoe faints during a test? Joe Shmoe has his pal Freddy take the test for him? All the same in the testing companies’ eyes. They’ll cancel the score and let the student take the test again. And this is how they might explain it (as ACT recently did to UCLA):
The ACT cancels scores for a variety of reasons, including illness of the examinee, mis-timing of the test, disturbances or irregularity at the testing site.... It is the ACT policy to treat the ACT’s reasoning for canceling a specific score as confidential.
Even in cases where cheating is suspected, as described in today’s Los Angeles Times, the testing company investigates students directly—but doesn’t tell the high school or college that Joe has run quite the scam.
It seems to me that, although sponsored by external organizations, college entrance exams are inextricably linked to high schools and universities alike. Their value has come into question as some institutions no longer require the scores, but for many students the SAT/ACT remains a significant part of the portfolio. And many colleges still treat it as such. So, if students choose to tinker with their score, is a statement about a student misbehavior a natural extension of a score report?
Fun factoid #2: Apparently this policy has been alive and thriving for over 25 years. Now that’s impressive.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
July 14th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
If a tree falls in a forest ... If an ed blog has no readers - apart from those disgusted with Liam ‘Menken’ Julian’s pompous NRO article on Douglass High - does anyone give a crap? Seriously, when is Julian going to apologize?
July 14th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Tom, as my colleagues have observed, it’s really quite wonderful of you to so consistently draw attention to my article, the link to which I gladly provide so that others may savor its flavor and plumb its depths as you have so fully. Many thanks for reading/ Liam.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWJmNDRlNGI5ZDI0MzFmOGQ3ZjY0OGY1NWUyZmU4ZTk=%23more
July 14th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Seriously, do you have any regrets on the parts of the NRO article which reference specific teachers? What are the feelings of your colleagues on this point? Unanimous that teacher-martyrs should be described this way?
July 14th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Lousy teachers shouldn’t be teaching regardless of the compassion and concern they feel.
There’s only one reason for them to be drawing a paycheck and if they can’t fulfill their obligations then naming them is the least offensive crime being committed.
July 14th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Students suspected of cheating on admission tests such as the ACT are to a large extent treated as guilty before proven innocent. If there’s a high correlation of questions answered incorrectly between students sitting in the same room—even at times when they’re a sizable distance apart—a student’s scores may be cancelled. The student is notified and invited either to accept the cancellation or take a different test to demonstrate by comparison that the most recent results were genuine. Unfortunately, this action can impede the application process for seniors.