I really appreciate Roots2Words. Thank you very much for all your work.
One quibble: It would be more accurate to say that standardized reading exams *claim* to assess advanced language skills. It is certainly very questionable whether any multiple choice game (such as the S.A.T.) can assess our skills in reading and writing, especially at a more advanced level, when reading and writing become much more subjective activities.
I appreciate your kind words but have to push back against your assertion that the SAT doesn't test reading and writing skills. The test absolutely tests specific skills in ingenious ways while also evaluating various proxy competencies like vocabulary knowledge. I've worked with tests like the SAT for over 30 years and recognize that the core reading skill of objectively understanding what an author writes a text to convey can be accurately assessed.
As someone who began teaching the S.A.T. in the fall of 1986, Mr. Bergin, I appreciate your longevity. The S.A.T. doesn't really test or assess anything-- any more than adeptness at crossroad puzzles demonstrates a broad or deep vocabulary. A high score on the reading and writing modules of the S.A.T. merely shows one's skill at recognizing the answers that the S.A.T. wants for these questions. Certainly, it shows some basic literacy, some competence and (more importantly) confidence with brief & convoluted paragraphs, and an adeptness at superficial vocabulary puzzles, but little of these comprise advanced language skills, which bring an awareness of the multitude of meanings in almost any text, not rigid right/wrong answers.
What, for instance, is the objective meaning conveyed in Dckinson's “My life closed twice before its close” or in Shakespeare's “King Lear”?
I have to agree that the SAT does assess reading ability very well; in fact, I don’t think it’s possible to be reading at a comparatively low proficiency and do well on the reading section of the test. (This feat is doable with vocab- and grammar-based question, though.) For me, also with 30+ years prepping students, I’ve also seen that the test surfaces latent comprehension/processing issues remarkably well—that kid who talks smart, seems on top of things, but has gotten by on knowing the kinds of answers teachers want to hear will struggle with certain reading texts and questions.
For all the gripes about standardized test and the SAT specifically, it is a well-constructed test overall, much like those produced in the golden age of standardized tests by ETS.
Of course, we’d need to define what reading comprehension actually is before we even begin the discussion, IMO.
Certainly, if you have only basic literacy, you won't score well on the S.A.T. or the A.C.T. (and you probably won't be aiming for college, anyway). Mike Bergin, though, stated that the S.A.T. assesses "advanced language skills," and there, it does not. Since one succeeds at the S.A.T. reading questions by giving the S.A.T. what *it* wants to hear, then it isn't assessing advanced language skills at all, in which there are very few right or wrong answers.
The one skill that the S.A.T. and, even more so, the A.C.T. reward that also is a skill in reading comprehension is paraphrasing, but I find many students who do not paraphrase well at all and yet score very respectably (660-740, say) on the S.A.T. They're good at eliminating answers and choosing the "right" one.
Matthew, I'm not sure what definition of reading you are gatekeeping here. The SAT evaluates reading comprehension, vocabulary, analysis, synthesis, and reasoning skills in sophisticated ways. Its emphasis is on nonfiction but fiction and poetry do appear. The SAT does not test deep literary analysis or substantial outside knowledge but absolutely assesses the ability to understand what an unfamiliar passage was written to convey.
Just my opinion, and I'm in California, where UCs don't accept SAT/ACT anymore. But 1990s to the oughts, I'd say. I was teaching several different tests (SAT, GMAT, TOEFL, GRE, ISEE, SSAT, HSPT) and prepping for the LSAT and GRE myself. I loved the puzzle aspect of the earlier tests, and loved walking students through the various strategies.
Most tests were on paper, so there was plenty of tests available; the GRE had its Big Book with iirc 32 full tests, for example.
ETS had its hand in most of these tests, and their questions were almost always unassailable. I'd even get personal replies from ETS with citations to the handful of challenges I mailed in.
I say this without judgment, just observation as someone who ran test prep courses: Nowadays the landscape is scattered, alternatives have appeared, and testing is no longer a given or a rite of passage as it once was.
I really appreciate Roots2Words. Thank you very much for all your work.
One quibble: It would be more accurate to say that standardized reading exams *claim* to assess advanced language skills. It is certainly very questionable whether any multiple choice game (such as the S.A.T.) can assess our skills in reading and writing, especially at a more advanced level, when reading and writing become much more subjective activities.
Again thank you for Roots2Words.
I appreciate your kind words but have to push back against your assertion that the SAT doesn't test reading and writing skills. The test absolutely tests specific skills in ingenious ways while also evaluating various proxy competencies like vocabulary knowledge. I've worked with tests like the SAT for over 30 years and recognize that the core reading skill of objectively understanding what an author writes a text to convey can be accurately assessed.
As someone who began teaching the S.A.T. in the fall of 1986, Mr. Bergin, I appreciate your longevity. The S.A.T. doesn't really test or assess anything-- any more than adeptness at crossroad puzzles demonstrates a broad or deep vocabulary. A high score on the reading and writing modules of the S.A.T. merely shows one's skill at recognizing the answers that the S.A.T. wants for these questions. Certainly, it shows some basic literacy, some competence and (more importantly) confidence with brief & convoluted paragraphs, and an adeptness at superficial vocabulary puzzles, but little of these comprise advanced language skills, which bring an awareness of the multitude of meanings in almost any text, not rigid right/wrong answers.
What, for instance, is the objective meaning conveyed in Dckinson's “My life closed twice before its close” or in Shakespeare's “King Lear”?
I have to agree that the SAT does assess reading ability very well; in fact, I don’t think it’s possible to be reading at a comparatively low proficiency and do well on the reading section of the test. (This feat is doable with vocab- and grammar-based question, though.) For me, also with 30+ years prepping students, I’ve also seen that the test surfaces latent comprehension/processing issues remarkably well—that kid who talks smart, seems on top of things, but has gotten by on knowing the kinds of answers teachers want to hear will struggle with certain reading texts and questions.
For all the gripes about standardized test and the SAT specifically, it is a well-constructed test overall, much like those produced in the golden age of standardized tests by ETS.
Of course, we’d need to define what reading comprehension actually is before we even begin the discussion, IMO.
Certainly, if you have only basic literacy, you won't score well on the S.A.T. or the A.C.T. (and you probably won't be aiming for college, anyway). Mike Bergin, though, stated that the S.A.T. assesses "advanced language skills," and there, it does not. Since one succeeds at the S.A.T. reading questions by giving the S.A.T. what *it* wants to hear, then it isn't assessing advanced language skills at all, in which there are very few right or wrong answers.
The one skill that the S.A.T. and, even more so, the A.C.T. reward that also is a skill in reading comprehension is paraphrasing, but I find many students who do not paraphrase well at all and yet score very respectably (660-740, say) on the S.A.T. They're good at eliminating answers and choosing the "right" one.
When was this "golden age of standardized tests"?
Matthew, I'm not sure what definition of reading you are gatekeeping here. The SAT evaluates reading comprehension, vocabulary, analysis, synthesis, and reasoning skills in sophisticated ways. Its emphasis is on nonfiction but fiction and poetry do appear. The SAT does not test deep literary analysis or substantial outside knowledge but absolutely assesses the ability to understand what an unfamiliar passage was written to convey.
Just my opinion, and I'm in California, where UCs don't accept SAT/ACT anymore. But 1990s to the oughts, I'd say. I was teaching several different tests (SAT, GMAT, TOEFL, GRE, ISEE, SSAT, HSPT) and prepping for the LSAT and GRE myself. I loved the puzzle aspect of the earlier tests, and loved walking students through the various strategies.
Most tests were on paper, so there was plenty of tests available; the GRE had its Big Book with iirc 32 full tests, for example.
ETS had its hand in most of these tests, and their questions were almost always unassailable. I'd even get personal replies from ETS with citations to the handful of challenges I mailed in.
I say this without judgment, just observation as someone who ran test prep courses: Nowadays the landscape is scattered, alternatives have appeared, and testing is no longer a given or a rite of passage as it once was.