Though the class of 2010 is the first to be admitted using the new SAT Reasoning Test, first administered in March 2005, it remains to be seen whether the new exam will be a more effective predictor of how students can perform in college, according to Dean of Admission Jim Miller '73.
"It is hard to know about the validity of it for a couple of years, because it has only been one class," Miller said. "The hardest thing for us is to start thinking on a 2400 scale as opposed to a 1600 scale. What I told students was for them to look at it this way: 'You definitely scored higher than your parents ever could have.'"
The College Board, the organization that administers the SAT, changed the structure and scoring of the test last year in order to make it a more accurate gauge of students' academic ability.
Changes to the test included a new writing section, the addition of third-year college preparatory math, more critical reading and the move to a 2400-point scoring scale.
"The new SAT will be a better yardstick of what people here have accomplished" while in high school, said William Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions and financial aid at Harvard University. "The symbolic importance of stressing writing on the SAT is critical. I think it will lead to real reform."
Among students who took the new version of the test, females scored higher on average than males on the new writing section, according to a press release on the College Board's Web site.
Math scores fell by two points on average on the new exam, and reading scores fell by five points on average. Changes to the reading section included the removal of analogies and the addition of more critical reading questions.
According to Caren Scoropanos, a spokesperson for the College Board, the writing section was "in no way" responsible for the slight drop in scores on the other sections.
The writing section was added "because we felt that writing skills are important in college as well as beyond," Scoropanos said.
While admissions officials have yet to determine the benefits and downsides to the test, members of the class of 2010 were able to take either version of the test - or both - and make their own comparisons.
"The reading on the old SAT was tougher than the new one because of the analogies," said Bryan Tracy '10. "Math was about the same on both - there was no real difference. And I think the writing section was a good thing to have. It gave us a chance to get more points."
Jessica Gamboa, a freshman at Princeton University, said she thinks the writing section "will help admissions offices in evaluating" applicants.
"Personally, I also like it better because I am a strong writer," Gamboa said.
The new writing section added 60 minutes to the exam, which used to take two hours and 50 minutes to complete.
"I took both versions of the test, and I have to admit that the biggest change for me was how long it took to finish the new SAT," said Daniel Oviedo '10. "I never want to go through that experience again. It was a waste of a good Saturday morning. I should have just stayed with my old scores."
