Unfair Standardized Testing

Standardized Testing: Making College Admissions “Fair”

Every year, the daunting prospect of undergoing standardized testing brings anxiety to thousands of high school students, and for good reason: a student’s performance on standardized college admission exams - most importantly, the ACT and SAT - is a major determinant in deciding where they will go to college. For decades, such standardized tests have been universally accepted as part of the admissions process: proponents argue, as Syverson (2007) explains, that such tests are the only way of standardizing college admissions when students from different schools have such widely varying profiles. However, in the past several decades a growing anti-testing movement has begun to poke holes

This is certainly an important factor: because high schools have differing grade scales, plus some amount of grade deflation or inflation, having a nationally consistent test is useful. However, while the SAT may be standardized, it is far from equitable. It has been found to have significant bias, particularly income-wise: as Biamonte (2013) found, the difference in average SAT scores between the lowest and highest income groups is nearly 130 points per section, adding up to a hefty difference across the test’s three sections. This disparity is partially explained by the use of aforementioned coaching methods; test prep classes and tutoring services are often pricey, a score-boosting luxury only available to those in higher income brackets. But test prep is only part of the picture, with much of the test-score differential originating far before any student even thinks about standardized testing. From the beginning, Biamonte (2013) explains, students from higher-income families have more opportunities: they attend better, higher-funded schools with more rigorous curriculums, AP classes, and dual credit, all of which impact standardized test performance. Consequently, higher-income students have an advantage over their lower-income

No, the purpose of improving college admissions is twofold: to give less weight to a broken system that doesn’t accurately assess students’ abilities, and also to find top-notch students regardless of their test scores - particularly among the demographics that are put at the biggest disadvantage in standardized tests. Shifting the focus away from test scores helps level the playing field for lower-income and minority students by forcing colleges to look at less biased factors. As Geiser et al. argue (2007), standardized test scores correlate strongly with income level, whereas GPAs do not; thus, GPA is a far more equitable approach toward measuring success. Furthermore, both Hiss et al. (2014) and the Tufts study (DiMaria, 2014) found that students admitted through the test-optional or unconventional admissions approaches were more likely to be underrepresented minority students. Thus, moving away from use of standardized tests would give thousands of students the opportunity to be recognized, even if their skills don’t fit with the testing model. But the holistic college approach perhaps has a greater impact than simply making admissions more