July-August 2001

« AAUP Homepage

Is the SAT Falling Out of Favor?

Richard Atkinson, president of the University of California, triggered a public debate about the merits of standardized admissions tests last winter when he proposed dropping the traditional math and verbal portions of the SAT (known as the SAT I) as a requirement for admission to the University of California. Atkinson suggested that students continue to take the separate SAT tests that measure knowledge in specific subject areas (collectively known as the SAT II). Although some institutions never required the test or have dropped it, the SAT I remains a standard requirement for admission to most institutions, and taking it has become a rite of passage for college-bound high school students. The test has been criticized on several grounds in recent years.

Noting that black and Hispanic students consistently score lower on the test than white students and that in most ethnic groups women score lower than men, some critics have charged that the exam is biased against minorities and women. Others, pointing to the high sticker prices on increasingly popular test-preparation courses, worry that socioeconomic factors as much as academic ability contribute to SAT success.

Even the central purpose of the SAT I, its ability to predict college performance, is unclear. Richard Steele, vice president for admissions and financial aid at Bowdoin College, wrote in an editorial published in the Washington Post in April that research at Bowdoin and elsewhere has repeatedly shown that the best predictors of academic success are not SAT results but recommendations, academic performance, and writing ability. Accordingly, Bowdoin does not require applicants to submit SAT scores.

The scores are often used as a factor in ranking public high schools, and many educators argue that linking school reputation and teacher salaries to test scores encourages "teaching to the test," often at the expense of complexity and innovation in education.

But the SAT I has its defenders. Many admissions officers continue to view it as a useful tool in gauging an applicant’s potential, especially in light of the wildly uneven quality of secondary schools, which makes the importance of grade-point averages difficult to weigh. Especially at large institutions with tens of thousands of applications each year, quick and quantitative measures of student achievement are necessary. Many colleges that do not require the SAT are relatively small institutions that can evaluate each individual application through the time-consuming processes of reading multiple essays, conducting applicant interviews, poring over portfolios, and weighing letters of_recommendation.

Some observers, while acknowledging the consistent score gaps between men and women and between whites and some minorities, argue that abolishing the SAT would address the symptom, not the illness. "It’s true that our students do not all compete on an ‘equal playing field’ when it comes to their academic preparation for college," wrote Linda Clement, former admissions director at the University of Maryland, in another Washington Post editorial. "But we can’t fault the SAT for this. . . . [I]t’s a messenger that tells us that we need to provide more resources to our most challenged schools."

Even UC president Atkinson, whose remarks set off the furor, does not reject admissions testing per se; his quibble is with the specific content of the SAT I. In May he invited the College Board, the organization responsible for the SAT, to collaborate with UC on creating an alternative admissions test.