David Burke dburke@media.ucla.edu
Click Here for more articles by David Burke
Do you remember the days in high school after you decided where
you wanted to go to college? Those were good days. You were free
from stupid standardized tests like the SAT and you thought that
you would never again have to face the laborious process of college
applications.
But many of you were wrong. Only a few years later, you will
have to go through the same impersonal process for graduate school.
This time the standardized tests go by different names ““
LSAT, MCAT and GRE ““ but their inability to accurately
measure you as a student remains the same.
Although the SAT has been scrutinized recently, the graduate
school exams have had an aura of sanctity around them. Nobody wants
to criticize the LSAT, MCAT, and the GRE ““ until now. I think
that these exams can be summed up using my own acronym: RCRAP.
Now I’m not opposed to all standardized testing. What I do
think is that the tests do not measure what they are supposed to
measure, that they are given too much weight by graduate schools,
and that the test taking process and the application process can be
amended in a way that will benefit the students and the graduate
schools involved.
The biggest problem with the graduate school exams is that they
are not taken under uniform circumstances. Some students study 500
hours and spend $1,000 studying for the exams, but many other
students cannot afford to do that.
According to some test-prep literature, the MCAT is supposed to
measure, “the high-order thinking skills necessary for
success in medical school, including analytical reasoning, abstract
thinking and problem-solving.”
How can the MCAT measure any of those factors if the only piece
of information that medical schools receive is a person’s
score? What does a 35 mean? That’s a good score, but what if
the student who earned a 35 spent his entire summer studying for
the exam and another student who did not study at all got a 32?
Which student has better “abstract thinking”
abilities? Graduate schools will never know based on an MCAT score
because such a score is completely inadequate for measuring
“abstract thinking” abilities. Instead, the score
actually measures ability to study and memorize pre-ordered methods
of thinking.
There is a large body of evidence that indicates student scores
on the MCAT or the LSAT can improve with studying. On the LSAT, I
personally know someone whose score fluctuated within a 23 point
range! That’s the difference between Harvard and Huckleberry
State.
Because better scores can be obtained through intensive study,
inherent abilities are overshadowed by the amount of time put into
exam preparation.
Although study skills are important, these tests overemphasize
that factor, almost wholly focusing on a student’s ability
and willingness to study for them. Graduate schools are making a
mistake by weighing those factors so heavily. One of the primary
criteria for admission should not be a score on a piece of paper
that is not indicative of the student’s ability for
preparation.
Luckily, there are many ways to improve the exams and the
application process. For example, the exams should all use uniform
standards for preparation. New exams could be continuously created
but not released to test-prep groups or to the public so that
students cannot study for them. Or, if the graduate schools would
like students to study first and then take the exams, they can
create test-prep courses that everyone must complete before taking
the exam. This would level the playing field.
The admissions process can be improved if the focus of
admissions shifts away from standardized tests in order to give
admissions officers a better picture of the actual person that they
are considering for admittance.
Most law schools do not require interviews, but they should. The
best way to know a student is to actually meet them.
Graduate schools should focus more on discovering what their
applicants’ lives are like with more personal essay
questions. Do schools want a 4.0 student who soils himself when
thrust into a social situation but is the world’s best
Counterstrike player, or a 3.6 student who writes for his college
newspaper, plays intramural sports, and actively participates in a
few campus organizations?
A change in the graduate school exams and a shift toward
actually understanding the daily lives of students will ensure that
more deserving students get into the schools to which they apply. I
know that it is not easy or cheap to change test and admissions
processes, but it is the right thing to do and everyone will
benefit.