(01-30-2020 01:58 PM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  As Bs and Cs vary by school district. I know, I moved here from Hawaii whose public school system was awful compared to the Blue Ribbon school that Warren Township in Gurnee was.

With that being said, the ACT and SAT are designed to level the playing field and gain an understanding of a students ability to go through a collegiate level curriculum. Annual Retention rates at universities aren't terrific to begin with. So now we let in a bunch of students who may or may not be able to handle collegiate level courses.

And let's say they are from poor families. What happens when they fail out? What happens to those big loans they took out? It's great they got a chance to go to college, but are they prepared to succeed in college? Seems like it's set up to fail so we can collect on enrollment till they drop out.

The ACT and SAT do not level the playing field though. They disadvantage largely poor and minority communities. If you're worried about the cost of college and student loan debt then take up that issue. but don't deny a kid an opportunity because you wrongly believe that poor kids are somehow less prepared for college because they couldn't afford the test prep classes that some of their peers could.

NIU is late to the party. SIU, WIU, DePaul, and University of Chicago all have some form of a "Test Optional" policy.

(01-30-2020 02:11 PM)DogTracks Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 01:18 PM)The Grinch Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 12:33 PM)randyfensfanclub1 Wrote:  Just tell me how you judge students with different curriculum? Is an A at Walter Payton the same as Thornton? Is the #10 student at Rantoul High = #10 at Whitney Young = #10 at Bloom = #10 at Loyola? Is math the same at all? Chemistry? Are they going to have a formula for curriculum to be reviewed or just grades? Or do we look at rankings, whether you were in band or one of 3 kids on the chess team?

It's a joke to let in whomever they want. Anyone who thought nepatism and connections were bad before this will be worse. Certain schools, program directors, teachers will be able to do even more. And NIUs academic rep is so great, they want to let MORE unqualified kids in. Might as well merge with Kishwaukee.

This to me is a panic to just increase enrollment. And of course, maybe some state and federal money.

The A at Thornton might be worth more than the A at Payton. The kid at Thornton might have earned that A while playing sport and raising his/her younger siblings while Mom works multiple jobs. Something a kid at a more "prestigious" doesn't have to contend with. The kid at Thornton may not have the resources the kid at Loyola has to prep for or be taught the test. That matters. It may force Universities to learn more about the students they admit which would potentially allow for admitting more qualified students. Not less.

Yep math is math. But maybe it takes you a minute to correctly finish the same equation that it took me three minutes to finish. However, I still correctly solved the equation. Am I unqualified because I work at a different pace than the ACT requires of me? College doesn't work like that though. I need to stay up all night to write a paper but you don't and we each get an A, it counts exactly the same.

What this likely does is allow more students from minority and poorer communities to be able to attend college. That's positive.

That's the thing- if you're a kid doing well at an under-resourced school, you're doing it despite larger forces slowing you down. A kid doing well resourced school doing well is doing it with the wind at their back.

The bottom line really is the article Stay Cool linked. The predictive value of the tests is *AT BEST* shaky, if not just plain not there. They do line up with social class status though- but NIU exists to provide access to opportunities.

About the only thing where I think tests have value is when you get someone (like me) who had middling grades and good scores- I was just underperforming for a variety of sadly normal teenage reasons.

Over a 1000 school have dropped test requirements. This isn't some ill-considered thing. The system was broken, it's up to the testing companies to re-design, improve, and show their value.

I believe SIU's policy is that the test scores must be provided if your GPA is below a certain number.

(01-30-2020 12:42 PM)HuskieJ Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 12:37 PM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 12:33 PM)randyfensfanclub1 Wrote:  Just tell me how you judge students with different curriculum? Is an A at Walter Payton the same as Thornton? Is the #10 student at Rantoul High = #10 at Whitney Young = #10 at Bloom = #10 at Loyola? Is math the same at all? Chemistry? Are they going to have a formula for curriculum to be reviewed or just grades? Or do we look at rankings, whether you were in band or one of 3 kids on the chess team?

It's a joke to let in whomever they want. Anyone who thought nepatism and connections were bad before this will be worse. Certain schools, program directors, teachers will be able to do even more. And NIUs academic rep is so great, they want to let MORE unqualified kids in. Might as well merge with Kishwaukee.

This to me is a panic to just increase enrollment. And of course, maybe some state and federal money.

I concur.

Third. Just more the same garbage that has pretty much already destroyed Higher Education.

Add me to this. Another joke.

Teaching directly for a test is a joke in our educational system. Makes it nice with technology to show graphs and charts but has little to do with preparing a student for success in the real work world. With that said I have no answers on how to fix the educational system.

(01-30-2020 02:15 PM)The Grinch Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 01:58 PM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  As Bs and Cs vary by school district. I know, I moved here from Hawaii whose public school system was awful compared to the Blue Ribbon school that Warren Township in Gurnee was.

With that being said, the ACT and SAT are designed to level the playing field and gain an understanding of a students ability to go through a collegiate level curriculum. Annual Retention rates at universities aren't terrific to begin with. So now we let in a bunch of students who may or may not be able to handle collegiate level courses.

And let's say they are from poor families. What happens when they fail out? What happens to those big loans they took out? It's great they got a chance to go to college, but are they prepared to succeed in college? Seems like it's set up to fail so we can collect on enrollment till they drop out.

The ACT and SAT do not level the playing field though. They disadvantage largely poor and minority communities. If you're worried about the cost of college and student loan debt then take up that issue. but don't deny a kid an opportunity because you wrongly believe that poor kids are somehow less prepared for college because they couldn't afford the test prep classes that some of their peers could.

NIU is late to the party. SIU, WIU, DePaul, and University of Chicago all have some form of a "Test Optional" policy.

Test optional is the way that makes sense.

Really it's a surprise it's taken this long for so many schools to push back on the testing companies. The weaknesses of the tests have been a topic for at least 20 years.

Can we just require attendance at 50 percent of basketball and football games for admission?

(01-30-2020 05:18 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Can we just require attendance at 50 percent of basketball and football games for admission?

We have a winner folks!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(01-30-2020 05:18 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Can we just require attendance at 50 percent of basketball and football games for admission?

Yes. Best idea!

(01-30-2020 02:15 PM)The Grinch Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 01:58 PM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  As Bs and Cs vary by school district. I know, I moved here from Hawaii whose public school system was awful compared to the Blue Ribbon school that Warren Township in Gurnee was.

With that being said, the ACT and SAT are designed to level the playing field and gain an understanding of a students ability to go through a collegiate level curriculum. Annual Retention rates at universities aren't terrific to begin with. So now we let in a bunch of students who may or may not be able to handle collegiate level courses.

And let's say they are from poor families. What happens when they fail out? What happens to those big loans they took out? It's great they got a chance to go to college, but are they prepared to succeed in college? Seems like it's set up to fail so we can collect on enrollment till they drop out.

The ACT and SAT do not level the playing field though. They disadvantage largely poor and minority communities. If you're worried about the cost of college and student loan debt then take up that issue. but don't deny a kid an opportunity because you wrongly believe that poor kids are somehow less prepared for college because they couldn't afford the test prep classes that some of their peers could.

NIU is late to the party. SIU, WIU, DePaul, and University of Chicago all have some form of a "Test Optional" policy.

I'm a minority and I'm from a poor family. I just told you I was in Hawaii which had among the worst public school systems at the time when I transferred to a significantly better school district.

This isn't about offering access to the minorities and kids of lower income. This is definitely about grabbing as many kids as possible to up the admissions numbers.

(01-30-2020 04:14 PM)mgm86huskiefn Wrote:  Teaching directly for a test is a joke in our educational system. Makes it nice with technology to show graphs and charts but has little to do with preparing a student for success in the real work world. With that said I have no answers on how to fix the educational system.

YES !! I agree...teaching to a test is terrible

[/quote]

I'm a minority and I'm from a poor family. I just told you I was in Hawaii which had among the worst public school systems at the time when I transferred to a significantly better school district.

This isn't about offering access to the minorities and kids of lower income. This is definitely about grabbing as many kids as possible to up the admissions numbers.
[/quote]

If you don’t have students you don’t have a school. It makes sense to increase the available number of students by removing a stipulation that often unfairly eliminates talented students. The result is that you very likely increase the diversity of your campus because what’s being eliminated adversely affects specific populations.

This model seems to be ok if you can sack a QB or dribble a ball where many times those same students scores wouldn’t get them into a lot of schools the attend. Lots of those kids do just fine in college.

This also combats brain drain from the state. IL already has a declining population. Over 1000 universities and colleges are test optional. Let’s limit the amount of bright people who move out of state because Wake Forest or Washington State was willing to take a chance on a kid we missed because of a test that has questionable a best usefulness.

Isnt the minimum ACT and GPA to get into NIU already fairly easy? Why drop the bar even further? Who are they trying to attract now?

The hurdle with NIU is the cost in conjunction with reputation not the admission standards...

This wreaks of desperation. As a graduate I am disappointed. I guess nothing else seems to be working, so let's try this. I assume the professors don't give out tests anymore either? Tests aren't a good judgement of knowledge, right?

(01-30-2020 07:54 PM)NIUSox10 Wrote:  Isnt the minimum ACT and GPA to get into NIU already fairly easy? Why drop the bar even further? Who are they trying to attract now?

The hurdle with NIU is the cost in conjunction with reputation not the admission standards...

Maybe a way to drop that cost is to increase enrollment? But I’m sure they’d just keep those extra tuition dollars. I don’t see this having a negative impact on any schools academic reputation. NIU, ISU, EIU...they’re all for the same kids. The ones who don’t want to go to community college but can’t get into/afford a B1G.

The admissions standards are already so low I don't think this will matter much. If it pays the bills, fine.

(01-30-2020 07:54 PM)NIUSox10 Wrote:  Isnt the minimum ACT and GPA to get into NIU already fairly easy? Why drop the bar even further? Who are they trying to attract now?

The hurdle with NIU is the cost in conjunction with reputation not the admission standards...

+1. We are going to accept more students who have a statistically lower probability of staying four or five years and graduating. Given the cost of attending NIU (over $20 grand a year with room and board), would the students we are not accepting now be better served by starting and establishing their academic record in junior college? Somehow this is more about NIU trying to increase attendance than insuring academic success of its more vulnerable students.

Ummmm. This is a brilliant idea. The news is misleading. They are guaranteeing admission to students with a 3.0 GPA and better. That doesn’t mean anybody can get in. It will help boost enrollment which has been trending negatively for the past 10 years.

https://twitter.com/abc7chicago/status/1...63105?s=21

(01-30-2020 09:41 PM)BDB5yp Wrote:  Ummmm. This is a brilliant idea. The news is misleading. They are guaranteeing admission to students with a 3.0 GPA and better. That doesn’t mean anybody can get in. It will help boost enrollment which has been trending negatively for the past 10 years.

https://twitter.com/abc7chicago/status/1...63105?s=21

That's a great idea then. With that being said. No issues

actually, previous gpa minimums were 2.5 and 2.75 depending on act/sat scores, so the gpa requirement was raised to 3.

You know why schools do it? As to NOT claim discrimination.

I know a kid who scored a 35 on his ACT at Northside. One of, if not the top school in Chicago. He didn't even get a look by Stanford, Ivy League or Duquesne, where he really wanted to go.

Why?

ZERO extracurricular activities.

Now, these schools. They know where they are getting kids from. For the most part,select schools, maybe a top 3 kid for a 2nd tier school with with a sponsor. But now, you throw away grades at some lesser schools. Add more and more "extracurricular" and background. You can judge these any way you choose. You can, in fact, fill or limit quotas. Tell me is a 3.8 basketball in easy classes player better than a 3.4 honors in band, science club? I mean do people really think they have people analyzing every application? Like they don't already accept those with lesser academic qualifications? YES, THEY DO AND HAVE FOR DECADES. Please, check a box and you get sorted. That is, unless, you have a sponsor.Like a guy I knew whose dad was Chicago Fire Chief, went to Naval Academy , hated it , then went to university of Chicago. And he was likely ranked maybe 25-30. Now, they just have a way to justify and not face lawsuits. It's all up to them on a personal level. Give me a break.

It's just a reflection of what the workplace is become thanks to certain megacorporations.