An Ineffective Test

When the College Board announced last week that it would restructure the SAT, much praise came as a result of its new efforts to appeal to low-income students—a demographic that, many claim, are put at a disadvantage when taking the test. Harvard’s own Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid William R. Fitzsimmons ’67 commended the College Board for deciding to make such changes. While we applaud the company for its intentions, we remain dissatisfied with the test itself. While the College Board is taking a step in the right direction by attempting to cater to students from lower-income brackets, its methods in measuring preparedness for college still lack effectiveness.

Among many other changes, come spring 2016 the new SAT will consist of only two mandatory sections and will be graded on a 1600-point scale, just as it was before 2005. There will be no penalty for wrong answers, and the vocabulary section will likely include fewer obscure words. Perhaps most notably (and laudably), the College Board will offer free tutorials online to all students that plan on taking the test, as well as organize for free college applications for students that are less privileged. The two latter policies are laudable changes, but this doesn’t mean the test is free from scrutiny.

We favor using standardized tests in college admissions: When properly conducted, they provide academic institutions with valuable and easily calculated information about members of a large pool of applicants. In order for these scores to be truly reflective of the applicant, however, standardized testing should accurately measure one’s inherent intellect and preparedness for college. In other words, a test should gauge one’s logic and ability to solve problems—not how much an individual has trained to answer easily-predictable questions. In making its questions more predictable, the SAT encourages cramming, not learning—which is standardized testing at its worst. Unfortunately, it seems that the SAT will still measure SAT-preparedness, rather than college preparedness.

Though the College Board will offer free online tutorials to all students, this still doesn’t stop higher-income families from obtaining expensive, private tutors and supplementary books in order to better prepare their children by teaching them SAT-specific strategies.

We have faith that standardized testing can be done right, and should indeed be a valuable component of college applications. We also appreciate the College Board’s decision to provide free support to students. Ultimately, however, the changes proposed do not seem sweeping enough to correct the test’s apparent bias toward higher-income families.