FITZSIMMONS: Yes. Just as we believed that a more curriculum-based SAT would serve high schools and colleges more effectively, we concluded that it would be much better for students to “test prep” by studying over a long period of time the kinds of things that would be vital for college access rather than spending much time and money for short-term “quick-fixes” that supposedly “gamed the test,” but in fact did not.
It had been clear for some time that short-term test prep (which is often very expensive) produced very little return. In fact, many of the inflated claims made by test-prep companies in the past were eventually eliminated after the federal government started looking into their claims. (The NACAC research is available to the public here.) There is no shortcut to doing well on standardized tests. Studying English and mathematics over a long period of time in the classroom, using free or low-cost publications (available in local libraries, guidance offices or online) on your own or as part of a program — or, to use testing parlance, all of the above — are likely to produce academic success in the classroom and, incidentally, better test scores.
The truth is that if students have been lucky enough to attend excellent schools, they probably don’t need test prep. For those not so fortunate, long-term test prep of all kinds — sometimes offered pro-bono by test prep companies and community organizations — can make a real difference to their academic success in college. The free test prep provided by the College Board and Khan Academy will help level the playing field for students from middle-income and most economic backgrounds.
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
