I'm surprised at all this hubbub about standardized tests. Low scores are nothing new, and the tests aren't exactly asking you to split the atom. Nor are they "unfair" unless by "unfair" you mean "skewed against people with marginal reading abilities." If everyone got good scores on the tests, there would be little point in having them. Someone that has a good GPA but does miserably on the test may just not be as bright as their GPA would indicate. The corollary is undoubtedly true as well.
I tend to agree, at least to an extent. Good GPA only means hard work, where as ACT tests actual knowledge. However, I think to much emphasis is put on the tests because that same hard work that got a good GPA in high school can bring a kid a good gpa in college.
I agree with that. No way that now I could make anywhere near the score on the ACT as I did 10+ years ago. I certainly could ace those old HS classes with ease though. My girlfriend recently took the ACT again, several years removed form high school, and she scored much much lower. She is back in college and doing very well though, but was curious how she'd do.
Work ethic is the single most important ingredient for being a good student. I dated a guy in high school who made a 30+ on the ACT, but he never graduated from college. He was intelligent, but he didn't work to make grades. He felt it was beneath him. And, there is something to cultural bias theories on those tests. I've done a book study in the past year on children coming from generational poverty, and the book suggests that there are certain "rules" of the middle class that aid students who are middle or upper class. Scoff if you will at that, but after being a teacher for 13 years, I can concur with that idea. The family and financial situations for children predispose a majority for a certain academic course--regardless of race, I might add.
