By: Caroline Roche
Abolishing standardized tests will give rise to classist alternatives
Ah, the dreaded SAT; between months of time-consuming and stressful preparation and the angst from awaiting results, why not just eliminate the test altogether? In light of many universities’ decision to no longer require standardized testing, some have advocated for its total abolition. Critics of standardized testing deem the system classist and unfair. However, abolishment is not a reasonable and ethical solution. Almost all colleges require standardized testing to objectively judge an applicant’s academic ranking. All college applicants take the same test and have an equal chance to demonstrate their knowledge. Despite standardized testing’s flaws, its abolishment would promote far more classism in college admissions.
Earning an A at a rigorous high school with an intensive curriculum is different from an A at a less difficult high school. Similarly, a B+ at some schools requires the same amount of effort as an A at other schools. This discrepancy presents a significant issue when it comes time for college admissions: if grades on a transcript are subjective, how can colleges assess a student’s knowledge objectively? The concept of impersonal grading is one of the many contributing factors to the success of the SAT. Experts, like education-system research director Aaron Churchill, agree that the SAT is necessary as it provides an objective, level playing field. The test comprises nearly identical questions and is administered under similar testing conditions for all takers. They are then graded by a non-bias machine or blind grader.
Many argue that the SAT is systemically classist. The Chancellor of California Community Colleges, Eloy Oakley, states that “many well-resourced students have far greater access to test preparation, tutoring and taking the test multiple times, opportunities not afforded by the less affluent.” However, eliminating the SAT would have a plethora of negative implications for lower-income students. Extracurriculars and bought-and-paid-for resumes would take the place of the SAT. Competitive sports are expensive, and so is a mission trip to Tanzania. Tests like the SATs are one of the only ways for students from underprivileged backgrounds to get ahead. Abolishing the SAT would eliminate the underprivileged students’ ability to demonstrate their academic excellence without costly activities. Sean-Michael Pigeon, a student at Yale University and an advocate for standardized testing, writes that because of “hard work, and high test scores, I now attend an Ivy League university with the help of significant financial aid. Testing and academic performance were the best way for someone like me to succeed.” Like many others, Pigeon didn’t have access to the best tutors or elite college preparatory schools, but his successful SAT results let his natural academic talents distinguish himself from those who did.
Despite the argument that standardized testing is unfair and only benefits the affluent, its abolishment will promote far more rigid classism. Ending the SAT would threaten meritocracy in America and ultimately put underprivileged students at a disadvantage. Abolishing the merit-based, decades-long tradition of standardized testing is not the solution to inequality in college admissions.
An SAT response sheet.
The College Board’s SAT logo.
