SAT--a failing test.
Author: Sacks, Peter. Source: The Nation v. 272 no13 (Apr. 2 2001) p. 7-8
ISSN: 0027-8378 Number: BRDG01018706 Copyright: (C) Reprinted with
permission from The Nation magazine. For subscription information please
contact 1-800-333-8536. Web site: www.TheNation.com.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Educators have long known the rap sheet on the SAT, the college entrance
exam that millions of young people have taken as a rite of passage for
some seventy-five years. Since its inception, the SAT has become among the
most scrutinized and controversial of standardized tests. And yet, the
exam--and the mental testing culture that has sustained it in the United
States--has been remarkably impervious to the attacks on it over the
years.

Recently, however, the SAT suffered a body blow when the president of the
University of California system proposed dumping the exam. Don't expect
colleges and universities to defect from the SAT en masse--it's too deeply
entrenched for that. But in announcing his far-reaching proposal in
February, UC president Richard Atkinson legitimized open discussion of a
heretofore taboo subject for large and selective universities: whether
they (and society) would be better off without the test.

Atkinson, an eminent cognitive psychologist, knows well the list of
particulars against the exam in question, the so-called SAT I "reasoning
test." As the progeny of the first intelligence test commercialized in the
United States, the SAT has proven to be a weak predictor of a student's
actual performance in the first year of college; after that, its
usefulness vanishes completely. Moreover, the SAT has proven to be a
vicious sorter of young people by class and race, and even gender--and has
served to sustain the very upper-middle-class privilege that many of the
exam's supporters claim to oppose. The latest figures from the College
Board, the SAT's sponsor, show that a test taker can expect an extra shot
of fifteen to fifty points on his or her total SAT I score for every
$10,000 that Mom and Dad bring home. Call it the Volvo Effect: a boost
that peaks out at the highest levels of family income. Being white, on
average, confers an extra 200-point advantage over a black test-taker.
Atkinson hopes that replacing the SAT I with the SAT II subject tests will
lessen such disparities and more accurately reflect what students study in
high school. In fact, scores on both exams are powerfully correlated with
each other, and UC's own data show that the SAT II also sorts harshly by
class, race and gender. More helpful, Atkinson intends to revamp the
entire UC admissions process by requiring campuses to evaluate applicants
more comprehensively than under the old numerical formulas, judging a high
school student's achievements in light of his or her social and economic
circumstances.

The SAT's shortcomings have become especially vivid in recent years, as
courts, voters and policy-makers in several states, including the UC Board
of Regents in 1995, have ordered public universities to dismantle their
affirmative action programs. Post-affirmative action, UC's most selective
campuses have seen freshman acceptance rates wane for blacks and
Hispanics. Meanwhile, the state's Hispanic population is forecast to
skyrocket from about 11 million in 2000 to 18 million over the next two
decades. Hispanic high school graduates will surge 74 percent over the
next decade, while numbers of white graduates are expected to grow just 2
percent.

In light of these trends, the usual justifications for the SAT's continued
dominance as a gatekeeper to UC would no longer wash. Yes, since 1968 the
admissions test has been a bureaucratically convenient way to sort and
weed large numbers of college aspirants. Yes, UC's relatively high SAT
scores made it look good in the test-score fashion show put out by US News
& World Report. Yes, the test was a common yardstick. But it was also a
crooked one, inflicting enormous social costs.

Of course, there will be complaints that Atkinson's tossing the SAT will
lead to the ruination of a great university: As UC opens the floodgates to
hordes of the academically unfit, standards will plummet. We've heard it
before, as when the University of Texas system enacted its "top 10
percent" law after the 1996 federal appeals court ruling in the Hopwood
case, which ordered the state's universities to end their affirmative
action programs. Beginning in 1997, any Texas high school senior
graduating in the top 10 percent of her class earned automatic admission
to Texas public universities--regardless of SAT scores. Did this produce
the collapse of a great university? Hardly. At the flagship University of
Texas, at Austin, SAT scores of students admitted under the top 10 percent
law, as expected, fell markedly compared with their peers from pre-Hopwood
days. And yet, their classroom performance actually bettered their
pre-Hopwood counterparts (that is, those in the top 10 percent who did
meet the SAT threshold), holding steady even in engineering, business and
science. To top it off, by 2000, enrollments of Hispanics and
African-Americans had been restored to their pre-Hopwood levels.

Ultimately, UC's faculty senate and the Regents could dash Atkinson's
hopes for a new era in the university's approach to college admissions.
Nevertheless, he has accomplished something of unquantifiable benefit by
helping to pry open a badly needed debate about the meaning of merit in
American higher education. Will we be a nation that judges young people
based on what they have accomplished and what they've overcome to do so,
or by how well they fill in bubbles on a standardized test that is itself
of questionable merit?

Added material.

Peter Sacks is the author, most recently, of Standardized Minds: The High
Price of America's Testing Culture and What We Can Do to Change It
(Perseus).