CompFAQs from CompPile | Placement / Arguments for the Use of the SAT and ACT to Make Placement Decisions browse

It should be noted that both the College Board and ACT Inc. approve of the use of the SAT and ACT as placement tools. The College Board does seem to move beyond this simple acceptance towards active promotion moreso, however. For example, the College Board has this to say about the use of on-campus administered SATs for placement:

“SAT® On-Campus allows colleges to conveniently administer the SAT and/or SAT Subject Tests™ to incoming and continuing students to determine which students are ready for entry-level college courses, which need remediation in basic skills, and which may be exempted from a particular course” (“SAT On-Campus” 1).

In addition, they also provide “Guidelines on the Uses of College Board Test Scores and Related Data” which prescribes the following steps to undertake in order to use the SAT as a placement tool:

7.1 Determine the appropriateness of particular tests through consultation with faculty members familiar with the content of the tests.
7.2 Establish standards appropriate to the performance levels and ranges of their enrolled students.
7.3 Accept the transfer of credits earned by examination at a previous institution in the same manner as transfer credit for course work.
7.4 Publicize their placement and credit policies, making clear which tests are used, how students gain access to them, what scores are required, how much credit may be awarded for each examination, whether or not credits granted meet degree requirements, and how much total credit may be obtained.
7.5 Establish standards regarding the age of scores and norms used for interpretation when setting placement and credit policies.
7.6 Periodically validate examinations and standards used for placement and credit to ensure their continuing relevance.
7.7 If additional fees are charged for credits awarded by examination, establish such fees at levels that represent actual costs involved in providing this avenue to credit rather than instructional costs or other unrelated costs.
In the same publication, they state:

The College Board’s councils have found that most test uses can be counted on to provoke at least some debate about their merits or limitations. The disagreements sometimes are based on differences in the specific circumstances of a particular use. Judgments about using test scores to screen applicants, for example, may be influenced by such considerations as how valid the tests are as predictors,how feasible it is to use other information instead of or in addition to the scores, and how many students are involved. The technical issues raised, however, are often of less significance than are questions of public policy and institutional prerogatives.” (“Guidelines” 4)

The College Board also provides the booklet “Setting Local Cut Scores on the SAT Reasoning Writing Section” to aid schools in deciding what scores should place students into developmental, “regular”, and accelerated courses.

On the other hand, while the ACT does list the test as one method of placement here and elsewhere, their acceptance seems more lukewarm. No other materials, such as the College Board guides above could be found.

Both the College Board and ACT Inc. offer free validation studies. The former provides ACES, and the latter provides information on their services here.

This said, arguments hinted at in the above materials, as well as a few new concerns are summarized below:

Using test scores for multiple purposes is cost effective.

This applies both to students and universities. For universities that would otherwise use a specialized placement test, this can be a very attractive proposition, and students are unlikely to complain about lower fees as well.

It’s convenient.

Again, using the SAT or ACT can potentially mean simplification for a university.

Using test scores for multiple purposes means fewer tests for students.

What student would complain about this?

High School grades are incredibly variable, and hence other indicators are needed.

For example, the College Board states, “Students in more than 27,000 secondary schools throughout the United States experience vastly different educational models and grading systems. In many situations, test results provide the only consistent and objective measure of students’ abilities and achievement in specific areas” (“Guidelines” 3).

Similarly, ACT Inc. States that “high school GPA may not always be an accurate measure of a student’s true level of achievement. This can be due to variability in the standards different teachers in different schools may use to assign grades to their students, or the characteristics of the particular population to which a student is being compared. . . Another complicating factor is variability in the pedagogical purposes behind the grades teachers may give. For example, some teachers may use grades not solely as a method of rating student achievement but also as a method of rewarding student effort” (“Are High School” 1).

Though tests aren’t always perfect, it’s important to remember that both organizations do strive for fair testing practices

The ACT endorses the Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education. In informational materials, they highlight the following sections of this code: “tests that are fair to all test takers regardless of age, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, linguistic background, or other personal characteristics.” Test developers should “avoid potentially insensitive content or language” and “evaluate the evidence to ensure that differences in performance are related to the skills being assessed” (Your Guide 18).

A full version of this Code can be found here

In addition, professor Paul R. Sackett draws attention to the fact that “fairness” can have several different meanings, and that only some are accepted by the APA’s [“The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing”: