In a welcomed move, Dartmouth has reversed its decision to stop using Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores in admissions. Many universities have yielded to claims that standardized testing is racist or inimical to diversity, including the entire California college system. This push has ignored ample research showing that these scores are the most reliable predictor of success. Instead, they rely on grade point averages (GPA), which are dubious given grade inflation and radical differences in grading systems.
Dartmouth issued a statement reinstating the SAT as an unsuccessful test-optional policy implemented during the pandemic: “Nearly four years later, having studied the role of testing in our admissions process as well as its value as a predictor of student success at Dartmouth, we are removing the extended pause and reactivating the standardized testing requirement for undergraduate admission, effective with the Class of 2029.”
What is alarming is how academics have ignored research showing that these scores are reliable predictors of success in college. Diversity policies have been given the priority over academic excellence. The result is that many students are being placed into schools where they are less likely to thrive and succeed.
As noted by the New York Times, studies at Ivy League schools show that GPAs hold limited value as predictors of success while test scores are highly indicative of success.
It does not matter in today’s academic environment. Then University of California President Janet Napolitano caved to this movement.
Notably, academics in the California system came to the same conclusion as Dartmouth years ago. Napolitano, however, overrode those conclusions.
Napolitano responded to the claims of racism in the use of SAT scores with a Standardized Testing Task Force in 2019. Many people expected the task force to recommend the cessation of standardized testing. The task force did find that 59 percent of high school graduates were Latino, African-American or Native American but only 37 percent were admitted as UC freshman students. The Task Force did not find standardized testing to be unreliable or call for its abandonment, however.
Instead, its final report concluded that “At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, [University] GPA, and graduation.”
Not only that, it found: “Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007 … Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines … In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority Students (URMs), who are first generation, or whose families are low-income.” In other words, test scores remain the best indicator for continued performance in college.
That clearly was not the result Napolitano or some others wanted. So, she simply announced a cessation of the use of such scores in admissions. The system will go to a “test-blind” system until or unless it develops its own test.
Even the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) yielded to this movement during the pandemic by dropping the use of standardized testing requirements. However, MIT later reversed that decision and reinstated the use of the tests as key to preserving its elite status as an educational institution.
Despite these studies, most academics are likely to remain silent over the deemphasis of standardized scores. Few want to be accused of being hostile to diversity goals. Instead, the National Education Association (NEA) and other groups simply repeat claims of the inherent racism of standardized scores by figures like Kendi X. Figures like Kendi X are routinely called to campuses to hold forth on how “standardized tests have become the most effective racist weapon ever devised to objectively degrade Black and Brown minds and legally exclude their bodies from prestigious schools.”
Former Barnard College mathematics professor Cathy O’Neil has written a column calling for “random selection” of all college graduates to guarantee racial diversity. It is ever so simple: “Never mind optional standardized tests. If you show interest, your name goes in a big hat.”
I have long argued against this movement.
The elimination of scores has a pronounced impact on students. While it will likely allow for greater diversity in admissions, it also removes a way for students to distinguish themselves in actual testing of their knowledge of math, English and other subjects. Yes, there are other ways to distinguish themselves, like community service and high school projects. Yet, as found by the UC task force, these tests do have a predictive value of success. Indeed, at a time when the United States is losing ground in math and science, the elimination of such testing could undermine our competitive position in a global economy; countries like China demand high levels of objective performance in areas like math and science.
There is an alternative. Rather than eliminate standardized scores due to the disparity in performance of racial groups, we should focus on improving the performance of minority high school students in these areas.
Testing results reflect a continuing failure of our public schools. The top-spending public school districts are also some of the worst-performing districts. New York topped the per capita spending, at $24,040 per kid. Yet, according to a 2019 study, over half of New York City public school kids cannot handle basic math or English. On tests, Asian kids shows a 74.4 percent proficiency in math, with a 66.6 percent proficiency for whites, 33.2 percent proficiency for Hispanics and 28.2 percent proficiency for African Americans.
Eliminating standardized scores does not erase true racial disparities in our educational system. Indeed, it exacerbates them.
Imagine that.
Who would of thought of it?
It might not be indicative of race, but if test scores are lower by percentage, within a racial group, it indicates a deficiency somewhere. This is not racism, it is statistical data – otherwise known as fact. How we want to deal with this might be racist or we can use our brains to understand why there is such a discrepancy and remedy it if possible. What you cannot do and still maintain a functioning society and economy is to lower standards so that “everyone gets a A”.
Whimsicalmama,
Well said.
But that does not keep some minorities on the Democrat plantation.
I would like them to explain why test scores are racist.
True that outcomes are diverse, but we are supposed to celebrate diversity in culture [aren’t all cultures equal?], and diversity in life style, and diversity in murder rates [54% of all murders committed by blacks] and diversity in historical figures [Cleopatra and Hannibal were black weren’t they?].
If we must celebrate diversity in everything else, why not praise diversity in IQ tests and standardized tests and eliminate racial spoils and quotas? You will get diversity in those areas whether you want it or not.
This was a long time ago. I was a graduate student on a graduate affairs committee. Our job was, among others, to screen graduate school applicants. We had a big department — 140 graduate students. One of the old-timer professors on the committee had the outdated opinion that GPA actually meant something. This was before 1980 and the value of GPA was already about nil. An applicant had a GPA of 3.95, but a GRE (the graduate version of the SAT) in the 20s percentile. There was a battle over this student, but he was finally admitted. He was just what the GRE predicted, but what wasn’t predicted was his tenacity at fighting being let go some years later. Lawyers involved.
As I wrote here previously, once employers begin to screen recent college graduate applicants to find out whether their universities used DEI criteria for college admissions and grading, these employers are going to take a long look at graduates from those universities. Especially employers that require a high degree of technical or intellectual competency. Perhaps Dartmouth began to figure this out. No university wants to get into a situation in which its placement rate of graduates is declining.
I wish everyone would understand that colleges are nothing more than business enterprises. There is nothing sacred or special about them. And there is no need for government to be involved in funding or subsidizing them. The billions of taxpayer dollars funneled to our colleges has not made them better and has not made them affordable. Millions of young people have wasted their time and effort pursuing worthless degrees in majors that leave them unprepared for actually earning a living. As should have been expected, government subsidies have resulted in too many colleges and too many students. Whether SAT scores are useful tools for determining success in college should not be a matter for public debate. Selecting students to admit to college should be a business decision left to the colleges. Without government funding, colleges would have all the incentive they need to pick the best students. My hope is that online education will replace most of our traditional colleges, which have become bloated money-suckers.
@pudnhead
I think so too, but technology isn’t the answer. Today’s kids can’t competently use the internet or email, let alone pursue self-study. Instruction is still necessary. We need to bring parenting back, too. Kids are showing up to school already deficient, and a teacher can’t impart what they miss out on at home (and that’s assuming the teacher themselves are competent. There are still good ones, but they are usually the veteran teachers). It’s a society encompassing issue, and I have no idea how we put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Most people woefully underestimate just how low most modern students are.
Maybe the universities should be responsible for repayment of student loans for failing to do their due diligence on student acceptance. Giving A’s to every student doesn’t equate to success in life. Had students recognized early on that life offers success in many areas besides a college degree things might be different?
You mean that some colleges will start back using a testing regimen that actually predicts future outcomes. Very strange but encouraging. Seems not too long ago it was quite plain that people who had high SAT scores did well because it required knowledge, an ability to think, a zest for continued learning, intelligence, and even hard work. One may not have a photographic memory but there are ways to retain taught and written material by sitting down and spending hours reading and rereading lessons and papers until it becomes imprinted on your brain. The smarter ones among us can often read, file away the material in their brain somewhere and move on while others take make more time. Ding the SAT can also show you where your strengths and weaknesses are. It can tell you that more work may need to be done in certain areas to redress your weakness. On the other hand it may show you that certain things like calculus and higher math is definitely not for you but you can still excel in multiple sciences and become a physician while still being a calculus cripple. If you go into academics in medicine then you simply hire that statistician to peruse your studies and determine it’s accuracy and if there is a significant difference in your study results. That’s also a skill, knowing where you are weak and then compensating. There are many ways to “success”.
For most of us smart people, hard work is a key to our success, but for geniuses they can work far less hard and have time to spread themselves over many disciplines that the simply smart cannot do.
SAT didn’t require any real prep work for me, and I got ~1300 combined (old scoring) twice in HS. OTOH, it wasn’t a very good predictor of success, either. At 17, I had no clue what I wanted for a career, and was in no way ready for college, and I knew it. But my parents had a college fund they had been squirrelling away since I was 3 yo, so they pushed me into it. My goal became to get as far away from home as possible, and to burn through that fund ASAP: both missions were accomplished. 10 years later, I discovered a vocation (IT) that I had both talent for and interest in, and pulled myself up by my bootstraps to have a lucrative 39 year professional career. So, while SAT scores and college performance may be useful indicators of the state of our society, regarding college success as synonymous with, or even a universal requirement for, a successful career is a mistake.
Democrats are openly bias against whites(unless you are a democrat power broker) and Asians and for Blacks…not sure about Hispanics.
Democrats just Love Judging people on race and gender!
Ever see the number of inner city kids at Grade level?
Newark funds their kids at $40k per student….29% are at Grade Level
Democrats want failure, to populate their plantations, where they skim the rescue money!
END Federal Funding of cities, states, colleges, non-profits where Anyone gets $100k+
I will say it again…time to END federal aid and student loan guarantees to colleges.
Let Democrats fund their failures!
Dartmouth’s Motto: Vox clamantis in deserto (a voice crying out in the wilderness)
– from the Gospel of Saint John 1:23, quoting St John the Baptist in describing himself in preparing for the coming of Jesus Christ
😳
Eliminate government-backed student loans and every university will restore sanity to their enrollment criteria.
I agree, but we need to completely remove the federal government from education. State governments are also a negative factor, but they would be restrained if federal funding were eliminated.
This /|\
then remove federal aid to states and cities.
Why are national taxpayers funding NYC transit projects?
Does some town in Iowa get it transportation funded by the FEDs?
Cut 50% of Federal Funding…it is just FUNDING Uniparty richest states!
Remember, the people who make these rules, the Blue nomenklatura, have no trouble getting their kids, and grandkids, into first rate colleges wherever they want to go. These rules are for us, not them.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
Today at the Court – Thursday, Feb 8, 2024
𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩 𝐯. 𝐀𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 (𝟐𝟑-𝟕𝟏𝟗)
The Court will convene for a public session in the Courtroom at 10 a.m.
The Justices will hear one oral argument.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/
Live Audio Link:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
[i.e.: Argument – Colorado ‘States Rights’ – Trump on/not-on Ballot]
A well-reasoned, thoughtful column. My compliments.
they said SATs were actually pretty poor at predicting college success.
First, the word success is fraught with vagueness. What is measured to determine success?
Then, I bet that the SAT’s are great predictors of those destined to fail. Isn’t that really the answer sought using SAT’s? Who is wasting the college’s time, because they lack the requisite talent.
College work requires a core set of knowledge (vocabulary, advanced math, scientific understanding etc.) also some skills, like test taking. Yesterday I was doing some online training, and had the option to start with a short quiz to determine of I needed the training. Having no formal training on the subject I missed passing by one question. Simple test taking skills will get you about half the test question.
So the SAT’s aren’t going to predict your future GPA. It will ferret out those missing core skills and knowledge.
Scholastic APTITUDE Test. Designed to screen prospective students (as you note) for those who lack the intellectual potential to successfully complete an academic degree course of study. What the scores do not measure is motivation and capacity for hard work, which are also essential to that pursuit. Since nearly all of today’s kids are severely lacking on both fronts, this is nothing like a complete solution, but it is a laudable start.
Kendri X (formerly Kendri Twitter) believes that the act of breathing air or drinking water is racist, so it’s ridiculous that he still has any kind of audience.
But seriously the modern fetish for “diversity“ over excellence should have an expiration date, and that date should be soon (though it probably won’t be). I mean imagine a hospital advertising its diversity as a selling point: Some of our surgeons are top-notch, some are mediocre, and some are frankly lousy and you’re gonna die. See how diverse we are? So come to us for your sugery.
Kendi does not believe anything. He is just a con man.
I don’t like SAT testing (though it’s better than nothing) because of the many testing variables. I’d prefer IQ testing with enhancement for verified performance.
Interesting. What “enhancement” to IQ testing would eliminate testing variables like those involved with SAT’s. Examples…? Maybe a link for further reading.
Search their social media history. If they were trolls, send them to labor camps to man up
Turley’s site never disappoints. Grow big and strong kid, you’re going need it.
Anon:
Interesting. What “enhancement” to IQ testing would eliminate testing variables like those involved with SAT’s. Examples…? Maybe a link for further reading.
*****************************
Sorry about the vagueness. I meant to say I’d give enhancements in the evaluations for verified extra-curricular performance like military service, charitable work, athletic performance or overcoming significant obstacles not of the applicant’s making. I don’t think IQ testing is the sole creiteria but it’s a big one.
I noticed on the admissions page of one of the Universities my daughter was applying to they said SATs were actually pretty poor at predicting college success. I thought to myself at the time, I wonder how long those admissions people will retain their jobs, probably a long time. Even if they change what is on their web page it’s the same people. SATs have always been an obvious measure of cognitive ability or general intelligence as it’s often called.
Colleges are for smart people just like modeling is for beautiful people and football is for large athletic people, etc. Yes I know some ethnicities are generally smarter than mine, not as individuals but generally speaking. Those people who are smarter have a better chance at many things in this life, I’m ok with that. I like smart people.