the Sam Jackson College Experience

Yesterday, EphBlog challenged me and other Yalies to defend Yale against Williams and other small liberal arts colleges. We stepped up to the plate and demonstrated a lot of Yale’s merits which were previously unknown to a lot of the EphBlog audience; likewise I learned more about some of the advantages of Williams in greater detail.

My final conclusion was that more education and understanding would be better for everyone, since it became clear that both schools were great and had lots to offer and that it was in the best interests of students to find the place that is the best fit for them. (Also, a lot of David’s troubles seemed to stem from his assumption that Harvard = Yale, a common mistake!)

EphBlog is a great community which, as I have written before, convinced me to keep Williams on my college list for much longer than any other small LACs and much longer than really made sense given what I was actually looking for in a school. I find myself in a position where I really value a lot of the benefits of smaller liberal arts schools–intimate communities, lots of faculty interaction, and much more–but at the same time have a compelling need for the resources of a larger school. That’s why I was especially drawn to Yale–I thought it would help me bridge the divide between large and small schools, something of a happy compromise.

So, in the spirit of promoting discussion and communication, I am going to start a series where I discuss some of what Yale has to offer specifically compared to smaller schools, and how it compensates for some of its potential shortcomings in relation to them. Consider this part one, the introduction. Below is the first part of the original post that I wrote in response to David and others at EphBlog; it wasn’t completed and would have been very, very long but you can see the complete discussion at EphBlog.

The second post / first real post is available here: Yale vs. Small Liberal Arts Colleges: part 2 (Money Matters)

Read the rest of this entry »

One of the most popular posts ever written for this blog was the one in which I wrote about the finer details within the 2006 Senior SAT College Board data. In a way, I am very much a beneficiary of the same standardized-testing and college admissions stresses which I rail against. However, that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t try to provide clear and accessible information about the 2007 Senior SAT data–information which will help de-stress applicants, hopefully, and also raise awareness of some of the ways in which the SAT is biased and why we should think twice before judging people on their SAT scores.

I’m going to break it up into a few posts, starting with this one about some general data for the SAT I: Reasoning, with another on percentiles and more detailed demographics, and one more about the SAT II subject tests.

There’s a lot of information in the total national report to cover, so I’ll start with the big picture and hit the most important tables. If you’re interested in the whole report, it’s worth checking out. I aim to give a narrative overview of what is going on in all the most important tables of that 18 page document, so if you don’t want to stare at numbers but want to know what’s going on… keep reading. Numbers given are in Critical Reading / Mathematics / Writing , or complete SAT I reasoning composite score out of 2400 maximum.

The College Board says this data can be used to

• interpret scores of individual students within the broader context of data aggregated across groups of collegebound seniors;
• study changes over time in the characteristics of students taking SAT tests; and
• look at year-to-year educational and demographic changes in this population, along with changes in test performance.

So let’s do the last two, and individual readers can do the first with their own scores or whoever’s scores they happen to have handy, if they want.

First things first–scores dropped for the second year in a row. These scores are “within the expected range” over the long term, but this continues the trend seen with the introduction of the “new” SAT last year. What does it mean? Nothing that should matter on an individual level–the test, in its new longer and more expensive format, is unlikely to change again any time too soon.

Of the 1,494,531 people who took the SAT, with an average composite score of 1511 (502 Critical Reading, 515 Mathematics, and 494 Writing), 53% were female and 46% were male; this mirrors results from last year. The score comparison is, for CR / M / W, Male v. Female, 1526 (504 / 533 / 489) v. 1501 (502 / 499 / 500): a total score difference of just 25 points, in favor of guys. Last year, the difference was… 26 points. You see where this trend is going? Females were helped, once again, by the 11 point writing section advantage in the new SAT, which held steady from last year.

Here’s some correlational information which I find especially interesting: breakdowns of who took the test when. The College Board tracks people over their high school years and indicates if they most recently took the test in Senior, Junior, Sophomore, or Freshman year. Of the graduating class of 2007, 1,001,667 took the test their senior year (either only, or most recently, as an additional sitting). 485,401 took it their junior year, and from there it trickles down with 6339 / 1124 for 10th and 9th grade, respectively. Now, the scores from these sittings? Freshman fare worst overall, and they don’t have writing scores to compare since it wasn’t around for them, but still manage a 1 pt increase over seniors in mathematics. People who only take the test their senior year are the next worse, with 493 / 505 / 486 for a composite score of 1484. Followed by, shocker here, juniors! Who go 522 / 534 / 511 for a total composite of 1567. The best scoring group are those who take the test only in their sophomore year, and their mean score is 1603 (526 / 549 / 528).

Lastly for today, a few Fun Facts, a preview of the percentiles and demographics data to come in the next post in this series:

• Of the 9% of test takers for whom English is not their first language learned (reporting), there was a 7 point mean increase on the math section, while there was a 32 point decline in the critical reading and 24 point decline on average in the writing section.
• 22% of test-takers say they don’t plan to apply for financial aid. (Why not? Lot’s of reasons, but a lot of those numbers probably should be applying, I bet!)
• Those students with coursework or experience in Italian did worst on the math section of all languages polled, with a mean score of 509–lower even than the dismal performances of “other languages.”

Look forward to more to come! Just didn’t want to overload people with too many numbers and too much text all in one place. Enjoy!

Looking to study for the SAT or just expand your vocabulary generally? Do you like words, and find them fun? Turn your back on those who might call you strange and keep reading…

1. Read a book online! You can get loads for free on Google Books (a lot? who knows!) or the Gutenberg project (over 20,000 free books). Or you can of course order one online from Amazon. Sorry, I know, books are a gimme, but people don’t read enough these days so I wanted to put it on the list.
2. Play Scrabulous! on Facebook or off it. Scrabble, even more addictive and accessible than ever. Always a great way to learn words. Look up what you don’t know, all while you try to make new words! If you aren’t familiar with the Facebook application which lets you play against your friends, check it out now. There goes your productivity. Sorry.
3. Play FreeRice. You guess words’ meanings and every correct answer donates rice to the United Nations towards ending world hunger. Feel good about learning new words… really really good!
4. Eric Barnes of ePrep sent me a link to their new WordSmith vocabulary game, which inspired me to make this post about a couple ways you can learn new SAT words. Key feature here is a ladderboard which adds a nice competitive element, so also worth checking out.

Two weekends ago I was in New York because I was part of a panel about “Admissions in the Internet Age.” My part was a very compressed summary of my general admissions-internet-teenagers philosophy with some examples of blogs and other online tools which appeal to students and are also great for schools. I said I would try to talk about “bridging the gap” between students and admissions offices / counselors where the internet is concerned. There were a lot of great questions afterwards and the panel as a whole did a really good job; I could praise my co-panelists for ages but instead I’ll just move on and talk about my reactions… to the audience reactions?

I’m very much happier with how a lot of the higher education landscape looks now for uptake of blogs and new media (as well as integration with other tools familiar with my generation) compared with what it was even just a year ago. I’m not saying things are great, or even good, but there’s a very definite measured improvement in attitudes institutionally from what I could smell in the wind. People were very interested in what I had to say, and not just in the way the monacle and tophat crowd are interested when they go to a zoo or circus.

For ease of digestion, I’ve made a list of some of my feelings (nine of them, to be exact) for your consumption:

Read the rest of this entry »

Hey all,

Midterms have consumed my life for the last couple weeks, and continue to do so, but as soon as I finish writing some papers I will be taking a train to New York for the College Board forum, where I am doing a little presentation on Saturday! Come visit me if you are there, Matt McGann (of MIT) and I will make sure it’s worth your time. I’m missing the first two days because of classes / other obligations, but hey, fun all the same. Give a call, e-mail, or carrier pigeon and say hello if you’re there. More updates when I get back.