TV is Dead, Long Live TV!

by

The sat word is dead, long live the sat word

Some years ago, I interviewed a pair of farmers selling pastured, hormone- and antibiotic-free turkeys for $4.75 a pound. They were heritage breed birds, Bourbon reds whose numbers had dwindled to dangerously low levels as the broad-breasted white — the Butterball — dominated.
At the time, the farmers were still a little queasy about slaughtering and selling livestock they’d raised. (One farmer had been a longtime vegetarian.) But by giving these turkeys a productive death, they explained, they were actually helping them survive.
If they weren’t for dinner, these birds just weren’t useful. They were neither cuddly nor well-behaved. They made terrible pets, and weren’t well-suited for life in the wilderness. They weren’t destined for poultry popularity, either — maybe your grandparents would recognize their gamey flavor, but it was nothing like the gravy-slathered protein that generations had gobbled down over the holidays.
But if they enticed enough Thanksgiving cooks to prepare them, the farmers saw a win for biodiversity and the birds. Give them a reason to exist, and these turkeys could thrive.
I thought of those birds recently when College Board President and CEO David Coleman explained sweeping changes planned for the SAT exam. Come spring 2016, the essay will be optional. The score scale will return to familiar ol’ 1600. The test prep will be free, and delivered via Khan Academy.
And, the SAT word will be no more, Coleman said. Just like those old-timey turkeys, it seems there’s limited use for the $5 words we’ve come to expect from the SAT.
SAT prep tests to be free for everyone

SAT prep tests to be free for everyone 01:21

PLAY VIDEO

Could you spell THIS word? 

Could you spell THIS word? 01:38

PLAY VIDEO

Epic spelling bee finally hails a winner

Epic spelling bee finally hails a winner 01:54

PLAY VIDEO

“Today, when we say that someone has used an SAT word, it often means a word you have not heard before and are not likely to soon hear again,” Coleman explained in his announcement.
You know these words if you took the test, its preparatory cousin, the PSAT, or almost any college-minded standardized test. You flipped through their definitions on flash cards, or faced them in a spelling bee, if you were that kind of kid. You probably still use a number of them: “threatened,” “vigilant,” “predicting,” “ousting” and “strengthened” all appeared on an SAT test in 2013.
Of course, “bellicosity,” “obduracy” and “garrulous” were on the test, too.
After the frenzy and stress of SAT cramming, the words become kind of a parenthetical joke, a chance to finally giggle at the absurdity of it all. Drop “mellifluous” or “loquacious” into a sentence after the college applications are sent, and you can actually stop to appreciate it — “Hey, I just used an SAT word!”
Coleman said he’s done indulging tricks and flash cards that promise to beat his test, especially at the expense of deep, analytical reading and understanding. If the college exam tests only obscure vocabulary words, “students stop reading and start flipping,” he said.
The redesigned SAT will instead focus on words students are likely to use over and over again, he said, like “synthesis” and “empirical.”
“The SAT will honor the best work of our classrooms — reading widely and learning how words work in their different contexts,” he said. “We aim to offer worthy challenges, not artificial obstacles.”
But I wondered, if the SAT abandons these words, what will become of “treacly” and “mendacious”? Are they turkeys on the verge of extinction?
Hardly, linguist Geoffrey Nunberg explained. The SAT wasn’t keeping them alive, he said, and flash cards weren’t doing justice to many words, anyway.
Sure, those quick definitions did well enough for a multiple choice test. “You can pick ’em out of a lineup,” said Nunberg, who teaches in University of California Berkeley’s School of Information. “If you see ‘mendacious’ and you think ‘dishonest,’ you’ve got the main idea.”
But “empirical,” he said? Now that’s a complex word. It’s got varied and layered meanings, some buried deep in history, or evolving only now.
“Under the guise of providing more user-friendly, fair tests, they’re merely substituting one set of SAT words for another,” Nunberg said. “If anything, this calls for more tutoring, and more background than the old words.”
He suspects that students might remember more from their SAT study sessions than anybody realizes, but the words are even less forgettable if students learn them through reading instead of flash cards. Regardless, the test will never get much credit; if you memorize a word and use it often enough, he said, you’re unlikely to be able to pinpoint that you learned it for the SAT.
And if you don’t use it?
“If people don’t use the word,” Nunberg said, “it’s because they don’t need the word.”
There are no guarantees about the vocabulary of the future SAT. The College Board certainly hasn’t released a list of banned words, and it’s not as if the passages will suddenly read like “Fun with Dick and Jane.” It wouldn’t be a test, Nunberg said, if everybody could answer all the questions correctly.
“Everything is an SAT word to somebody,” he said.
Consider just one of the changes coming to the SAT in 2016: Each exam will include passages from meaningful historic documents like the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”
In King’s nearly 7,000-word letter, he dropped “cognizant,” “superficial,” “moratorium,” “unfettered,” “ominous,” “ordinance,” “paternalistically,” “incorrigible,” “zeitgeist,” “sanctimonious,” “nullification,” “gladiatorial,” “scintillating” and “existential.” Any of them could be called an “SAT word.” Any of them could be on the new test.
So, word lovers, do not mourn the next generation’s vocabulary. Educators, do not celebrate the end of flash cards. The SAT word is dead, long live the SAT word. These turkeys still have a long time to cook.

cinematically insane

seinfeld-jerry“That people will only watch television like this in the future is so obvious,” Jerry Seinfeld said this week at the Hulu upfront event for advertisers in New York City.

Seinfeld was talking about streaming of course, and his message was clear: subscription VOD services like Hulu will render traditional, live, linear channels obsolete, much as TV did to network radio in the 1950s. Like Jack Benny and Burns and Allen – who moved from radio to TV more than half a century ago  today’s shows will transition from broadcast and cable origination to on-demand, and the viewers will follow.

Seinfeld can be forgiven for hyperbole, considering that he was likely giddy over the bags of money Hulu is dropping on his doorstep in return for exclusive streaming of all 180 episodes of his 1989-98 NBC sitcom. But I think he’s wrong.

There’s no doubt that the TV paradigm is shifting, in a way that…

View original post 534 more words

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: