Negative Aspects of the SAT

The sit requirement should be completely phased come on from the college admission. The sit down has been used as the primary means of assessing bookmans. The sit is commercially print show that contain a number of items and have a uniform turn for administration and scoring. The problem with the increase in SAT is that the tests present some(prenominal) challenging obstacles for savants and teachers.The message existence sent to students is that the scarcely thing that matters in their whole educational experience is their test score. Rather than con lean the root problem of academic failure, attention is being focused on comparing loads among schools. Fratt (p. 17) frame that 62 percent of the states in which the SAT exams have been adopted to assess the students abilities have experienced a high and continuously increasing drop out rate.The high-scoring schools be settle models, and the blue-scoring schools argon seen failure (). As test get ahead are relied on for important educational decisions such as college admission, questions need to be raised(a) about the validity of the SAT.Negative Aspects of SATThe SAT provides worthwhile information, but lacks realism and counteracts the educational process. The U.S. is the only nation that relies upon SAT for college admission. Countries such as Europe and Asia use essays, oral exams and exhibit of students work. These assessment measures consort to measure students skills and knowledge in a more meaningful way including high-order thinking and problem-solving skills, whereas the SAT tend to focus on concrete, isolated skills (Black & Duhon, p. 90-98).An assumption of the SAT is that if a student is able to perform a skill in the test, he or she is able to perform that same skill in his or her own work. For example, if a student can perform de-contextualized editing on a SAT exam, he or she will be able to edit his or her own work.The SAT tends to focus on isolated skills, encourage miserable- level comprehension, rely only on multiple-choice formats, and produce scores at times that are not useful in planning instruction. Students are not involved in their own assessment.Labels may cause educators or put ups to inappropriately alter the treatment towards these children. Children who receive low scores usually are placed in special classes wher the curriculum involves drill and skill worksheets. They fail to gain what their advantages peers are learning. School personnel often have lower expectations for students placed in lower tracts or remedial classes due to low-test scores. These children are more likely to receive an inferior education and they do not get admission in good colleges (Buell & Kralovec, p. 17-18).Using test results can be harmful to students receiving low scores as well as high scores. The SAT exams are used to identify the academically gifted and talented. Children identified as such as usually given additional material and resources in school. Th e students who score high on standardized tests show stress-related symptoms and a fear of failure. This heavy emphasis on scores can devalue teacher judgment and seriously affect a students self-esteem. Test-induced stress can lead to increased anxiety in all students. Low performing students oddly feel that they have already failed, and the test just adds to their feelings of low self-worth.The greatest disservice a chunk test can have on a student is the depletion of a students self-esteem. Students recognize themselves as failures when they receive labels such as behind, at-risk, immature, and remedial. Children who do poorly on tests tend to feel poorly about themselves and possess negative images. When students are labeled slow learners because of the SAT exams, their educational opportunity becomes narrowed and unchallenged. These students begin a lifetime of drill and skill worksheets. High portions of these students come from minority groups or special classes. Every tes t reflects the background of the people who construct the test, who are for the most part white, upper to middle class professionals. Most of the experiences they are questioning come from their background leaving out the background of many of the potential test-takers (Heriot & Wonnell, p. 467-483).The SAT exams are also biased in favor of English-fluent pupils only. more limited English proficient (LEP) students are improperly assessed and decisions about their placement are made incorrectly. voice communication dominance seems to have a negative effect for students of different cultural backgrounds, and non-English speaking students have concern with interpretations of test language. Tests are written with complex grammar and oftentimes are hard to understand.As test results are shown, students who are more likely to fail include the disproportionately poor and African American students, which undermine the mission of offering all students an opportunity to learn. Children fr om low income and minority groups are often harmed for life because of low test scores. The curriculum is dumbed-down for these students because the educators feel they cannot handle the regular curriculum. This leads to a boring curriculum for these students (Stahlman, p. 242).Civil rights and parent advocacy groups are challenging that these tests penalize minority and at-risk students who have been short changed education. African Americans and Latinos are usually forced into the bottom tracks solely based on their low test scores.Another negative wedge to low-income students is the fact they have not had some of the experience as other students. If children come from affluent families and stimulus-rich environments, they are more apt to score higher on the SAT exams. On of the chief reasons that a students socioeconomic status is highly correlated to scores on the SAT exams and college admission is because many questions on the tests measure what is learned outside of school. S ome students are offered more experiences than others, thus affecting their scores (Ullman, p. 18).ConclusionAssessment is needed in the public schools that benefit all students and focus on up(p) learning instead of ranking and labeling students into specific categories. The SAT exams are not perfect or irresponsible measures of what individual students can or cannot do. For instance, paper-and-pencil tests give teacher only part of the picture of a students strengths and weaknesses. A students scores on a particular test may also vary from day to day, depending on whether the student guesses, received clear directions, follows the directly carefully, takes the test seriously, and is pleasant in taking the test.School personnel must not limit assessment to the SAT exams or allow them to dominate the assessment. Assessment is definitely multidimensional and must take into consideration multiple measures to tax a persons full capabilities. Without a more inclusive assessment proc ess, those who can make to and benefit from society will be forever excluded from the opportunities to do so. The researcher after reviewing the literature that has been published in past and that has been discussed in this paper that the SAT requirement to get admission in a college should be phased out in order to make the process of college admission fair and transparent.Works CitedBlack, H. T. & Duhon, D. L. Evaluating and change student achievement in business programs The effective use of standardized assessment tests. Journal of upbringing for Business, 79 (2) (2003), 90-98.Buell, J., & Kralovec, E. High-stakes testing, homework, and the gaming system. Humanist, 65 (3) (2005), 17-18.Fratt, L. Graduation exams under the microscope. District Administration, 41 (4) (2005), 17. Retrieved May 17, 2007, http//www.districtadministration.com/page.cfm?p=1052.Heriot, G. L. & Wonnell, C. T. similar tests under the magnifying glass A defense of the LSAT against recent charges of bias . Texas Review of Law and Politics, 7 (2) (2003), 467-483. Stahlman, R. Standardized tests A teachers perspective. Childhood Education, 81(4) (2005), 242.Ullman, E. Study High-stakes tests have no effect on achievement. District Administration, 41 (11) (2005), 18.