The college admissions process is more competitive than ever before, with more than 70 percent of colleges reporting year-to-year increases in the number of applications they receive, according to the NACAC.. More students are applying to and attending college, and, in turn, more emphasis is being placed on tests like the ACT and SAT. Many people argue that these tests are the fairest way to evaluate students on an even playing field against their peers, however, there are many factors, other than intelligence or college readiness, that affect a student’s performance on these tests. Some students are poor test takers who may be highly intelligent but lack the ability to perform well on timed exams. Some students do not have access to private test preparation classes and/or tutors that other students do. Some students have skills, knowledge or expertise in areas that aren’t measured on the tests, like arts, athletics, music, foreign language or life sciences. For these reasons and more, there needs to be a better way to evaluate students for college admission. The ACT and SAT do not effectively measure students’ abilities or predict their success in college due to narrow testing parameters and inherent biases in the test prep process and the tests themselves.
Limited Subject Matter The SAT tests students on Math and English skills, and the ACT tests them on Math English and Science, however there is more to a student than these limited subjects. Intelligence is measured by the whole students’ abilities, both cognitive and non-cognitive, and by placing so much emphasis on a test that only measures a student’s ability in narrow subject matter, these standardized tests do not tell the whole story. According to Renee M. Fauria and Luana J. Zellner in their article in The Journal of Adult Development,There is increasing evidence that non-cognitive variables are predictors of college success, which contradicts the use of intelligence-based tests as exclusive criteria for college admission. Furthermore, intelligence does not necessarily correlate with getting good grades, making the effectiveness of aptitude tests to predict academic success questionable. Research suggests that The ACT/SAT examination composite scores taken from admission data seemed modest and inconsistent predictors of college success. In his article in Educational Psychologist, Steven Semler, a researcher who has spent nearly two decades studying the purposes of school and how those purposes get measured via testing, asserts that the tests are not accurate indicators of college success because they measure only specific content domains like physics and history, when cognitive abilities like critical thinking and ethical reasoning are equally, if not more important.
Not a holistic view of the applicant It is important to note that the ACT and SAT are not IQ tests and do not measure students’ intelligence or likelihood of achieving success in college. Some very intelligent students with excellent grades in school may score low on these tests and, in turn, be discouraged from applying to a college that he or she is otherwise qualified to attend. This perception of failure is one of the most dangerous aspects about using the ACT or SAT as a ‘judge’ of a student’s abilities, especially because many students tend to label themselves as poor test takers regardless of whether it is true or not. Robert Sternberg, former president of the University of Wyoming and former Dean of the School of Art and Sciences at Tufts, has logged years of research showing that GPA, standardized tests, and essays do not successfully measure the true talent of a college applicant. Sternberg presents his research in his article in Change: The Magazine Of Higher Learning, suggesting that the traditional college application process focuses mainly on analytical skills, giving students with certain backgrounds an advantage and prohibiting colleges from admitting the most creative and adaptable student populations.
Socioeconomic and racial biases Another flaw in the use of ACTs and SATs as primary criteria for college admission is the socio-economic biases that exist, especially with regard to test preparation. Some students spend years and tens of thousands of dollars preparing for these tests, while others must rely solely on the preparation offered at their high schools. Research suggests that that Black and Latino students at high poverty high schools in Chicago had little knowledge about the actual ACT, despite the fact that they had high educational aspirations. These minority students had to rely on their school as the primary source of information regarding admissions tests despite the fact that the schools did not provide accurate information, and students were unaware that there were study skills and test-taking strategies that one could learn in advance. In more privileged high schools, there is more emphasis placed on test prep and most students have substantial knowledge about the importance of standardized testing as it relates to college admissions. Other research has shown that factors like a competitive and nurturing high school, parental education and family income are significantly related to students’ orientation toward taking more AP courses. a stronger college-going culture, more elite forms of test prep and higher SAT scores. While the exams offer the illusion of an even playing field, there are too many academic, racial and socio-economic biases that come in to play. Standardized tests reinforce social disparities and are an unfair method of evaluation. In their book, SAT Wars: The Case for Test-Optional College Admissions, Joseph Soares and David Hawkins assert that standardized tests reinforce social disparities and are an unfair method of evaluation. Along the same lines, a commission of the NACAC also cites bias as a reasoning against the mandatory use of SATs and ACTs in the college admission process. The commission, led by Dr. William R. Fitzsimmons, Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid at Harvard University, called for institutions of higher learning to re-think the significance of exams that are “more likely to predict household income than a student’s performance in college”.
Miscellaneous In addition to the aforementioned arguments against the SATs and ACTs in the college admissions process, different learning styles, test taking anxiety and illness or other random external or internal circumstances on the day of the exam can all contribute to inaccuracies and unfairness in the test results. It could be something as small as forgetting to eat breakfast, or something as big as being sick, or hearing bad news before the test, but performance on these exams is often random and susceptible to influences beyond the control of the students.