Ho is a fourth-year policy and media studies student and
president of Bruin Democrats. Illustration by GRACE HUANG/Daily
Bruin
By Melanie Ho
Question: Which of the following sentences characterizes the SAT
I test?
(A) It is irrelevant to the original purpose that it was
designed to serve.
(B) It is gender- and race-biased.
(C) It is an impediment to true learning and education.
If you had taken an expensive test-preparation course, you might
have learned that getting the right answer doesn’t depend on
what you know as much as knowing how to take the test. Through some
combination of “POE” (process of elimination) and other
test-taking strategies with clever, easy-to-remember acronyms, you
would have deduced that the answer is actually (D) All of the
above.
Such a test-preparation course might cost $800 and might promise
to raise your score 100 points. You might consider paying an even
greater amount, maybe $5,000 or more, for private coaching. In
regards to the question above, your private tutor would also teach
you savvy test-taking strategies. If she were honest and
didn’t mind exposing you to the problems of the SAT, even
though it might cost her job, she might discuss the following:
(A) The SAT is irrelevant to the original purpose that it was
designed to serve.
When the SAT was created in the early 1900s, it aimed to
identify talented students from a wide range of backgrounds,
regardless of whether they attended a weak or strong secondary
school. Thus, college admissions officers would be able to fairly
compare students from different schools.
Today, it is clear that the SAT’s original goals of fair
selection and accurate prediction have not been met. Test
preparation has become a $100 million industry that ensures
wealthier students a higher chance of success.
When reviewing applications, admissions officers have no way of
knowing who has been “coached” and who has not
been.
Also contrary to one of its objectives, the SAT is not an
accurate predictor of a student’s later success. Though some
studies show that the SAT can predict how well a high school
student will do academically in the first year of college, the SAT
cannot predict whether a student will actually finish college or be
successful in a future career. High school GPA and class rank are
typically better predictors of success in college courses.
Furthermore, according to Harvard professor Christopher Jencks,
“No other country uses a test like the SAT I to screen
university applicants.” Instead, other countries use tests
that evaluate what prospective applicants have studied in high
school; these tests better resemble university examinations and
more accurately predict college grades.
(B) The SAT is gender- and race-biased.
Though females generally earn higher grades throughout both high
school and college, they tend to receive lower scores on the SAT
than males. Proponents of the SAT argue that this difference is due
to the fact that more females take the test than males. But twice
as many males as females achieve SAT scores over 700; if the
difference were simply due to a larger pool of females, then
females should attain the same percentage of high scores as
males.
In 1976, Educational Testing Service (ETS) Researcher Carol
Dwyer gave evidence for the fact that a test’s content can be
gender-biased. In the first several years of the SAT, females
achieved higher scores than males on the verbal section. ETS
determined that the verbal test needed to be balanced more in favor
of males and purposely added questions pertaining to subjects to
which males are socialized to pay attention (politics, business,
sports). After this change, males have consistently done better
than females; yet, no effort has been made to re-balance the
questions since then.
Furthermore, many psychologists and other researchers have
determined that the format of the test (multiple-choice,
speed-based, encouraging of risk-taking) is also biased against
females, who are socialized to solve problems differently than
males.
Not only is the SAT biased by gender, but is also biased by
race. A significant amount of research has been done on what is
called “the black-white test score gap,” by which, in
the past year, African American students scored an average of 100
points lower on the math and verbal sections than white students.
The reasons for the test-score gap are numerous and interconnected,
including different levels among white and black students of
parental education level, quality of school systems, treatment and
expectation levels from society and the educational system, and
socioeconomic status.
Moreover, a type of “self-fulfilling prophecy” and
“stereotype threat” can cause black students to perform
more poorly on tests when they are expected not to perform well.
Stanford psychologists have found this to be the case when they
conducted a study comparing academically successful black students
to equally successful white students.
(C) The SAT is an impediment to true learning and education.
University of California President Richard Atkinson recounted a
story of visiting a private school and finding 12-year-olds
drilling for the SAT. In our current educational culture, schools
are encouraged to “teach to the test” instead of being
concerned solely with knowledge and critical thinking skills.
Students should be concentrating on their high school education and
experience, not on how to take a standardized test that measures
neither their ability, accumulation of knowledge or future
success.
Given that (D) “All of the above” is correct, UC
President Atkinson’s proposal that the UC system eliminate
its SAT I requirement is a step in the right direction toward
equality in UC admissions. Atkinson’s proposal also calls for
the development of a new standardized test that would be based more
on how well a student has learned the college preparatory subject
material in high school. Before such a test is developed, UC
admissions officers may evaluate students based on high school
grades, SAT II scores and other non-academic talents and
experiences as early as 2003. The enactment of such a proposal
requires adoption first by the Academic Senate and UC Board of
Regents.
While Atkinson’s proposal could ensure a more fair UC
admissions system, it is far from the end-all solution to
inequities in higher education admissions and education in general.
The SAT II may have a higher correlation with a student’s
future performance than the SAT I, but it is also fairly new; a
more intense examination of the SAT II tests will undoubtedly open
up a new Pandora’s Box of biases and problems.
If ETS attempts to come up with a better test, an action which
Atkinson’s proposal is expected to encourage, the $100
million test-taking industry will follow right behind it with ways
for students to crack the new test.
Teachers may follow with new ways of “teaching to the
test,” encouraging students to memorize facts instead of
developing critical thinking skills.
Standardized statewide (or national) testing could also force a
standardized curriculum among schools in areas that may be
regionally and culturally very different. Who will decide this
curriculum, what will be included, what will not be included, and
why?
The dilemma of college admissions is only one among many
troubles in our educational system. We also must face shortages of
qualified teachers; inadequate school facilities, resources and
technologies; cultural, racial and institutional biases; and the
lack of availability of early childhood development programs.
Atkinson’s proposal is a good, bold answer in a slew of
such problems, one “A” that can be awarded in the
educational policy arena if the Academic Senate and regents go
along with it. But a truly good “report card” of equity
in education won’t be earned with this one high grade alone.
When it comes to educational equity and college admissions, we need
to keep asking the questions and examining all of the answers, and
for this, we don’t have the aid of an expensive test prep
course to help us do so.