I'm okay - You're okay
-
Apr 21, 2008 Posted by Ned Johnson
I got a call from a grad student the other day looking to retake the LSAT. He had done prep before and scored a 148. The LSAT is scored on a 120-180 scale, so a 148 is somewhat akin to a 480 on the SAT Reading or Math, not a score likely to gain you admission to strong programs. So, the score would have to come up to improve his choices and chances. The complicating factor is that he had already applied to and been rejected from top-tier programs, consternating his girlfriend who had been admitted to the programs he hadn’t and (oh yeah) whom he had told he had gotten a 168. Oops.
He and I talked through what preparation he had done before, what had gone well and what hadn’t, and what a plan going forward might be. I introduced him to the concept of working memory, its role in standardized tests and how anxiety can whack working memory. Then, putting on my best therapist’s hat, I suggested that he really ought to tell his girlfriend the truth, that he hadn’t scored nearly as well as he had told her because he had been embarrassed and afraid. First, it was pretty darned important to their relationship. If she walked, that would be telling. Honesty, we agreed, was a pretty important part of a good foundation for any relationship. Secondly, he would likely want and benefit from her help in another go around. At the very least, how would he explain to her that he needed to take the test again, as his “168” was more that what he needed for the schools that had turned him down? Lastly, he had set himself up for a nearly Sisyphean task: he needed a higher score not only to gain admissions to top programs but also to restore his integrity and relationship. Um, get a 168 or you will remain a liar. Top 168 and all is saved? Ugh. That is a hugely difficult burden to carry into what is already a demanding and stressful exam. Tell her the truth, ask her forgiveness, and unburden yourself so all of your energy can be channeled to productive ends.
It reminds me of a story a friend of mine told me. She is also coach and, among other things, works to help students develop self-confidence and strong self-esteem. She was visited by a young woman who was rather shy, with downcast eyes and one arm curled up against her body. In the course of their conversations, the girl related that her arm had been crippled in a car accident. Somewhere along the line, my friend somewhat boldly made the point “So what?!?” As at this point they were comfortable with one another, she asked what she liked to do, both before and after her accident. “And now, you are no longer a dancer and a rider, you’re a cripple?” My friend coached Jenny to introduce herself to people with “Hi, I’m Jenny. You may be wondering about my arm. Yeah, I hurt it in a car accident, so it no longer works. And, what’s your name?” Jenny was able to address the matter, putting it aside for her comfort and that of people she met.
We see students who are seemingly just as “crippled” by their test scores. One young woman I am working with for the SAT, when asked her scores, replied “terrible.” Not quite the objective facts I was seeking but pretty darned telling. Her score were just under 500. Ok. A good place to start. In discussing strategy, I laid out what is necessary to get scores over 600, not an easy task, but a not unreasonable goal. “Well,” she said “I am really hoping for scores in the 700s.” Uh-huh. I explained that I never argue for anyone’s limitations and simply could not say in our first ten minutes of knowing one another whether that was reasonable or unreasonable. But my take looks a bit like this: If I go out for the cross country team and run a 14-minute mile, the coach might understandably not feel that he has his new star. But, he may. Perhaps I got lost in that loops through the woods. Or was dodging stinging bees. Perhaps I was recovering from mono or had three chili cheese dogs for lunch. I would likely need to run faster to make the team. But my goal, though, should not be to run the next time a 4-minute mile. Sure, I could start at the pace. But, I’d likely be taken away on a stretcher with an oxygen mask. Go for a 12-minute mile. With that in hand, train for a 10-minute mile. Then 8 and so on and so forth. What schools was “Chloe” looking at? Grades? Where did the goal of 700s come from? Not unsurprisingly, it turned out that she has an older sister whose 750s set the bar. Chloe wanted the same scores to be just as good, to get the same accolades, to measure up.
The SATs are a pretty imperfect measure of a few things and a lousy measure of many others. The SATs purport to predict first year college grades and to measure “reasoning ability.” I’d give them a C on both accounts, but will leave that to others. Beyond that, the SATs are used to evaluate teachers, school systems, investment banking applicants, familial pecking order, and the list goes on. All of which is bunk. The test was not designed for those purposes and shouldn’t be used as such. To the degree that students, parents and others do, they not only risk impairing all manner of senses of self and relationships, but also test performance. And, perhaps we should rewrite that as: To the degree that students, parents and other think the SAT measures things it doesn’t, they not only risk undermining test performance but more importantly impairing all manner of senses of self and relationships.