The 610 smartest colleges and universities in America, according to Business Insider

Only 610?

Well, that narrows it down.

Bard College president: SAT is part hoax, part fraud.

No need for a detailed set-up.

So says Leon Botstein, president of Bard College, in an essay to Time Magazine:

"The SAT will continue in its revised form to face challenges. It is part hoax and part fraud, albeit a profitable one. The College Board, however, is not entirely to blame. David Coleman is to be admired for trying to rescue an outdated, sinking ship. The real responsibility for our sorry state of affairs regarding college entrance examinations rests with our colleges and universities themselves. The elite institutions have willingly supported an alliance with the College Board to make their own lives easier, and we Americans seem to have accepted this owing to our misplaced love affair with standardized testing and rankings as the proper means to ensure educational excellence."

And...

"The commonsensical truth is that the only legitimate test is one where a question is put forward and an answer required with no options or hints. The one major reform in the new SAT seems to be the dropping of a required essay. This is ironic because the one thing colleges need to know in their admissions process is how well a student can think, construct an argument, and persuade. Asking a student to sit down and write essays in an examination setting might be an excellent way to discover an applicant’s command of language and thought. This one potentially useful piece of evidence has been made optional."

Everything Botstein says works except praising the College Board's David Coleman. Saying Coleman deserves admiration for preserving what is described as a "hoax" and a "fraud" is like saying you appreciate an artist selling fake Picasso's.

Sure, it looks good in theory, but it isn't real, is it?

The SAT is getting a makeover.

The last time the SAT was given a face lift was in 2005. Out went the perfect score of 1600, in came a required essay portion.

Now, the College Board, which constructs and administers the SAT, is bringing back the perfect score of 1600 and doing away with the essay (or at least making it optional), starting with tests in 2016. Likewise, obscure vocabulary words will be dismissed in favor of more commonplace choices, and test takers will no longer be penalized for guessing. Only correct answers will count toward grading.

David Coleman, president of the College Board, claims the change is for very good reasons, namely that SAT preparation courses offered by the likes of Kaplan and Princeton Review give wealthier students an advantage.

"The College Board cannot stand by while some test-prep providers intimidate parents at all levels of income into the belief that the only way they can secure their child’s success is to pay for costly test preparation and coaching,” said Coleman at an event in Austin, TX, announcing the changes.

As part of equalizing test preparation for all students, the nonprofit Khan Academy will offer free online SAT prep courses available to everyone.

Meanwhile, over at the New York Times, a relatively glowing, in-depth feature examines Coleman's motivations as purely noble in trying to help those financially less fortunate. Says the Times:

And what’s at stake, he often makes clear, is not just the fairness and usefulness of an exam but our nation’s ability to deliver opportunity for all, which, really, is about the soul of the country. 

You heard it, folks. The new SAT = the soul of our country. Eat your heart out, Thomas Jefferson.

Book Review: Native Speaker, by Chang-Rae Lee

This is part of the continuing series of random book reviews that'll be nothing like a New York Times book review. Gone is the ten thousand word analysis. Instead, here is a book review like you'd tell your friends.




The book: Chang-Rae Lee's Native Speaker.

Review:

So all your major characters sound like they received a perfect score on the verbal portion of their SATs.

Gotcha.

SAT test question asks students about reality television. Snooki somehow comes out looking like the most intelligent person involved.

The SATs were apparently held last weekend. This was obvious from the slew of Volvos parked outside test-taking facilities with mothers sitting inside their idling cars panicked that little Ambrose or Audrina's score might not justify the $125-an-hour tutoring session they paid for the last six years in preparation for the test.

The writing portion of the test asked about reality television--which has drawn criticism from parents and students alike. Wait, did I say criticism? I meant overblown, righteous indignation.

Charles Wolock: the world's smartest person (with a #2 pencil).

Standardized tests are amazing things that tell a lot about a person. Specifically, they tell a lot about how well someone takes standardized tests.

This means we can tell a lot about Charles Wolock. Charles is a senior in high school outside Kansas City, MO. And according to the Kansas City Star, he had perfect scores on both the SAT and the ACT.

This means a variety of things for Charles:

1.) He's really good at standardized tests.
2.) Colleges and universities that blindly accept students based on standardized test scores just saved themselves five minutes and mailed out an acceptance letter to Charles without his even having to apply and waste a stamp.
3.) He probably has a really good supply of #2 pencils.
4.) People probably high-fived him a lot after he got his grades back.

I never took the SATs myself. (Long, sleep-inducing story that you needn't know.) And the only ACT I know of is the name of a low-brow mouthwash and an even lower-brow brand of microwave popcorn

But, hey, more power to Charles. Hopefully he gets a scholarship out of it. Or at least a gift card to Panera. Denny's, even. Something, you know?

Go to a private college? You're a genius. True story!

Back in 1950, the average GPA of a college student in the United States was 2.52. That's right, your grandparents weren't too bright. You always knew there had to be a reason why they lied about walking seven miles uphill in a raging snowstorm to school. Now we know it was all probably a cover story to explain their shaky GPA.

GPAs at both public and private colleges generally rose in tandem until 1950. But, starting in 1950, something magical and wonderful started happening at private colleges: their GPAs started skyrocketing while public college kids' GPAs only rose marginally. Thank God, too, because you'd hate to see a private school student not get an advantage in life at some point.

According to a study by two researchers, Stuart Rojstaczer and Christopher Healy, GPAs at private colleges kept running wild until they finally reached the current average of 3.3. Public colleges tried to keep up--but fell short, at only 3.0. In short, public college professors padded grades--they just didn't pad them as much as a private college professor did. Or, put another way, there's nothing to say we're not all still 2.52 GPA students as a whole--but damned if all sides aren't going to lie enough to make us all seem brighter.

Private school people can't claim they're of a higher caliber. The researchers used only students of nearly identical makeup (SATs, backgrounds, income, etc.) from both public and private schools to help create the average.

The nifty little part of this all is that by having higher GPAs private school students are led to have a greater chance at being placed in medical schools, law schools, and PhD programs--just from admissions officers smitten by bigger GPA numbers. Likewise, such advanced degrees often lead to better employment prospects upon graduating (at least on the medical and law school front), with higher income and greater advancement. All, possibly, from a professor padding your grade. If professors held any more power, they might start levitating. 

Just don't tell your grandma all this. She might claim that with inflation her GPA was really a 10.97 all along.

The GRE is to suspect testing as...

A.) A fat kid is to cake.

B.) Lawyers are to slip and falls.

C.) Vermont is to Birkenstock wearing.

D.) A Phish concert is to hazy memories.

If you feel like this is a trick question, then you're a sharp one. Nothing gets by you. All four apply! Congratulations on being perceptive! You win nothing. Sorry.

If you're completely unaware, or if you simply haven't brushed up on your acronyms in awhile, the GRE stands for Graduate Records Examinations. It's like the SATs, except only for go-getters and masochists: those who really want to get a Masters degree or a Ph.D. The GRE is run by the fine folks at ETS. They sure do love them the acronyms at ETS. ETS is "Educational Testing Service," a company founded in 1947 and based out of New Jersey. (Nothing comes from Jersey without raising a few eyebrows. Not even Bruce Springsteen.)

ETS runs countless standardized tests, from the ones you've heard of (SAT, GRE) to the head-scratchers (TOEFL, TOEIC, NMSQT). They're also a registered nonprofit organization with the United States, specifically a 501(c)(3). Most of us envision a quaint little group of do-gooders with Crest smiles trying to make the world a better place whenever we hear the words "nonprofit organization." We picture people handing out medicine to sick children or saving trees or rebuilding homes after a devastating hurricane. You know, doing the stuff you and I are too lazy to do.

But ETS can't be bothered with noble measures to earn their non-profit status. They're too busy living large in Jersey on a 376 acre campus and making some sweet, sweet handfuls of cash. Now, we could quibble over the very legal definition of what a "nonprofit organization" means, but why be such a Debbie Downer about it all? Okay, sure, a "nonprofit organization" means an organization that distributes its surplus funds only for the benefit of their cause--not as money for shareholders, individuals, or executives. And being a non-profit means you get a delightful little federal tax-exempt status AND never have to report any financial information to the Securities and Exchange commission. But using legal definitions is such a downer when ETS is the epitome of class.

See, ETS claims they're simply creating standardized tests for the benefit of the individual. They're not trying to make a buck off anyone. (Pretend the GRE doesn't cost $150 to take.) And, yeah, sure, they've pretty much monopolized the marketplace on standardized testing around the world to the extent that Wal-Mart looks like a quaint mom and pop country store. But that's just because they offer a quality product!

Actually, a good number of people are questioning what kind of product ETS is really offering, and whether they're quite as noble as a nonprofit organization should be. New York state passed the Educational Testing Act, which requires ETS to become a little less opaque to students when it comes to questions and graded sheets.

That's amateur hour compared to what's going on in the good ol' U.K. According to David Laws, a member of the House of Commons in Parliament, ETS Europe was considered to be in "shambles" (presumably said in a very thick English accent while drinking a spot of tea). Read all about it...here. See, it seems the British run a standardized test as well for their schools, and it appears they gave the testing contract to ETS in 2008. Except ETS screwed up a little. And by "a little" I mean they forgot to score some of the tests...or scored them improperly...or completely lost people's tests and scores altogether.

Or, as my grandmother used to say, "If you're going to screw up, screw up royally and really make your mark." (She was a sage. Especially after a few cocktails.)

Americans for Educational Testing Reform (who like to go by the acronym AETR, because apparently the world is obsessed with acornyms) have begun raising a ruckus about ETS, claiming that ETS violates its non-profit status routinely. ETS does have to file tax forms to the IRS, even if they're tax-exempt, and if you do a little digging you can find out some fun facts, which is what AETR did. Like:

1.) ETS' CEO Karl Landgraf makes seven times the average of the compensation-to-revenue of the top five non-profit CEOs in the country.

2.) Landgraf makes just a wee less than $1 million dollars at ETS.

3.) ETS has sixteen "trustees" that make an average of $32,688 a year. The trustees work so little that they actually get paid about $419 per hour on average, with some making $600 to $800 an hour.

4.) The "trustees" collectively make over a half million dollars a year.

5.) ETS made a profit of $94 million in 2007.

Now, the one thing about being an English major is that reading comprehension is usually one of my main skills. So, consider me a bit confused when ETS--a non-profit company--makes a $94 million profit. How does that work? And, more importantly, why do I need to pay $150 to take a GRE test when ETS is floating on $94 million profit from its last reporting period? But, like I mentioned at the beginning, being designated a non-profit company means the SEC doesn't have to investigate any curious financial dealings by ETS. Thank God. I wouldn't want to feel like I was going broke for some unseemly reason.

Karl Landgraf, the CEO making almost $1 million for a non-profit, once said, "Tests and quality go hand in hand. At ETS, we're doing our part."

And Karl is right. ETS sure is doing its part. The question is if that part is to fatten their wallet.