Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Is Talent Search testing becoming meaningless?

Same with my DS. He has not read any science book at home for a long time, but still got 25 last year and 24 this year. DS used to be a science kid and his teacher let Him lecture 1st graders about sun/moon/earth season relationship once. Now his interest has shifted totally from science (especially chemistry) into alchemy and mythology. They do have science in school, covers from force and motion to weathering and corrosion, all just barely introduction, nothing in depth according to DS.

The Talent Search testing may become meaningless only if you accept that single set of nubmers as the ultimate final word on your child's ability. The Explorer is styled as an achievement test, but I think it is only an achievement test if you are either an 8th grader or have learned 7th grade curriculum.

There is obviously a continuum of grades/ages/curriculum coverages/preparations of the test-takers so the extent to which it serves as an achievement versus an abilities measure may varied considerably. For my 3rd graders, who did not prepare beyond looking at the sample questions in the packet, the Explorer is more of an abilities test than a true achievement test. For example, neither child has studied science curriculum above 3rd grade, but DS scored a 20 while DD scored a 17 as 8-year-olds. As a matter of fact, while DS does have some interest in science/technology (so may have inadvertently exposed himself)DD hates Science and has a decided aversion to all things non-fiction so I know you do not need any exposure to do decently on the Explorer. Of course, I am not saying that DD's 17 in Science is a great score, but that you can do decently (63rd percentile) compared to 8th graders without any interest/preparation/exposure if you have good reading comprehension and logic skills.

Regarding the SAT CR, I have definite opinions as I considered teaching prep courses (SAT/LSAT) part-time ages ago. According to the stats, reading comprehension was the one category that these prep courses were least successful in raising the scores by any considerable amount. Unlike the other areas, there aren't tricks or discrete/limited content to master. Reading comprehension (at those levels) takes a longer period of time to raise significantly than test-takers typically spend preparing. Of course, that may no longer be true as schools now have freshmen take the PSAT and generally make test prep available to all. I am going back a quarter of a century, but it was not so crazy that I did not prep beyond taking the PSAT and took the SAT once. Of course, had I not scored in the 99th percentile, I may have considered taking the SAT again. My situation would likely be unheard of today.

I've only read the last two replies here, but I did want to chime in that the science test on the Explore is probably one of the more g loaded subtests on the test, especially for younger kids, in that it isn't testing science knowledge so much as logic and reasoning ability. It is, therefore, less dependent on the child having exposure and less subject to prep as the pp mentions for the CR part of the SAT.

Both of my girls did well on the science test of the Explore through talent search as well; actually I think that they got the same score on that subtest in 4th grade -- the one grade in which they both took it. One of mine is heavily into science and the other one not so much so, but she apparently has good enough ability in the areas it is testing none the less.

We are no longer participating in talent search, though for a variety of reasons. Dd13 is in high school now and, although you can participate in 9th, I'm not sure that those scores wouldn't show up on a more "permanent" record once you're in high school. Dd11 isn't interested and we were part of that group who went through the difficult experience a year or so back when it turned out the talent search agencies were administering questionnaires to our kids about motivation, self perceptions regarding ability, etc. before the Explore w/out telling the parents. I was not totally happy with the way that went even though the practice was discontinued after it came to public light.

Cricket2, I had not heard of this issue and don't quite understand what the problem was--were they trying to do some kind of psychological study without the parents' permission? Or trying to screen kids for how well they thought they would do in school or some other program? We're new to this stuff and it's good to know what to look out for.

The thread would be so old that I can't find it, but there was a huge long thread and discussion about this a year or so back when it came to light. Apparently for years the major talent search agencies were essentially conducting studies of our kids during the Explore without our permission or knowledge. The kids were given questionnaires before the test with questions like, "are boys or girls better at math?" and, "do you think that you are better at math or reading?"

The survey ran along the lines of Carol Dweck's work that kids who believed that they did well b/c they were just naturally able were more likely to give up when tasks were hard vs. kids who believed that hard work mattered in success. Part of the concern, aside from the lack of permission to administer the questionnaires, was implanting an idea in kids' minds right before they take a hard test.

One of the parents here found out about it from her child, asked the local talent search, and posted here about it. That turned into a lot of us contacting our local talent searches and they were all in on this together. My local TS director admitted that she had always felt bad about not informing parents, that it didn't feel right, but none the less she didn't inform or ask our permission even if it didn't feel right and kept allowing it to happen year after year.

All of the TS agencies insisted that the data was not being used for anything b/c no informed consent had been gathered, but it apparently had been going on for many years none the less. When all of the complaints started coming in and some of us also contacted the agency that administers the Explore, they all agreed to discontinue it.

My kids never participated in talent search again after that, though.

If a student does better on the SAT in 11th grade than in 9th, I doubt the presence of the 9th grade SAT score will harm the student's chance of admission at a selective school -- but this is speculation.

ETA: Princeton Review http://www.princetonreview.com/sat-score-choice.aspx says this:

[M]ost colleges want to see all of your scores. And most colleges already consider only your highest scores (by section or by test date) when making admissions decisions.

Let's say you take the SAT Reasoning Test in June and earn a 610 Math, 520 Critical Reading and 580 Writing, for a cumulative score of 1710. Then you take it again in October and earn a 590 Math, 640 Critical Reading and 620 Writing, for a much better cumulative score of 1850.

You might be tempted to use score choice and withhold your June scores. But that would be a mistake. Sending scores from both test dates will help you with schools that consider your highest score from each section (since you earned a higher Math score in June), and it won't hurt you with schools that consider only your highest set of scores. So the mix–and–match schools would give you credit for a cumulative score of 1870, and the highest test date schools would put you down for an 1850.

If you bomb one of the SAT Subject Tests, it may make sense to withhold the score. Just make sure that this does not violate the policy of any of your prospective schools.