After today’s class discussion, I wanted touch more on the SAT. Not only is this test very popular and a determining factor of one’s future, but it also was the last standardized test I took. My experience with the SAT may be considered “privileged”. Firstly, I was able to afford to take the test more than once. After I received my first test score back, I was able to hire a tutor to help me prepare for the English/Writing section for when I took the test again. My public high school also offered a class in SAT Math Prep, in which I enrolled as well. Because of this guided preparation (and I like to think my own studying contributed to), I was able to dramatically raise my scores on my second SAT exam.
Is the SAT discriminatory against class and race?
The more I reflect on this question, the more I think SAT is absolutely discriminatory. First, there is the issue of affording extra tutoring or prep. In my case, this guidance really helped to increase my score. The prep taught me not so much material as it did the tricks and methods for answering questions in a short time frame. What if I wasn’t able to afford this extra help? Would I have improved my scores as much? Since I would argue that I probably wouldn’t have, I think this personal example shows how the SAT is discriminatory based on social class.
After reading Au (2009), I also now believe that SAT can be discriminatory by race as well. Au (2009) goes into detail on how SAT test questions are selected. To be brief, possible test questions are put onto current tests to see how they will be perceived and answered by students. Test creators are looking to see if the new questions are answered correctly by students who typically answer other questions right. Since students who have prep courses usually score better on the SAT, their answers to these possible questions are more heavily weighed. That is, if they answer it right, it is considered a valid test questions and vice versa. However, students who can afford prep courses are often affluent, white students. Does this make the SAT (based on its questions) inherently biased and discriminatory? (Au, 2009: 49-50).
Besides considering the inequality of the SAT, I also think it’s interesting to consider why these inequalities continue to persist. Unfortunately, it’s not just test makers, standardized test advocates, and business oriented politicians that are suppressing minorities. We, personally, are also to blame. As our Professor pointed out in today’s lecture, students often attribute their success to their individual effort. Like in my experience, I want to believe that my increased test scores were a result of my personal preparation and studying. It’s hard to admit that my success on the test could be attributed to social or structural issues. No one wants to admit that they did well on a test because it was practically designed for them. Are we then the ones to blame?
What are other solutions?
Comments
6 responses to “Is the SAT discriminatory?”
I do not disagree that the SAT discriminated against those who cannot afford test prep and tutors who can teach you “how” to take the SAT. However, I have struggled with the idea that there is still value in the SAT for college admissions purposes. The SAT is essentially an IQ, and those who have higher IQ’s will perform better on the test than those who have lower IQ’s. I witnessed these outcomes firsthand in high school; kids who studied very hard and managed to get good grades, could not seem to perform well on the SAT, even with test prep and tutors. I found the opposite to be true as well; that some students who didn’t work very hard in school would manage to get great scores on the SAT because they were inherently bright. So to an extent, I suppose the question about the SAT’s value might be, do colleges have the right to “know” the IQ’s of the students they are admitting?
There’s no point in this blog post that I want to refute. However, it did make me think of how the SAT could possibly be viewed by colleges. It is true that there are many smart, and hardworking kids who do not do well on the SAT for various reasons. Some of those reasons may include being a bad test-taker or not being able to afford test prep courses or tutors. Whatever the reason, I think most people would agree that the SAT is not a final solution to determining which kids are smart and which ones are not. It is clear at this point that is not the case. However, I think it is true that kids who do well on the SAT are smart. It takes a certain type or amount of intelligence for someone to score well on the SAT. So although it is true that a bad SAT score does not mean that someone is dumb, I think a good SAT score does indicate that someone is smart. I don’t think these two situations contradict each other. I found this interesting to consider.
On possible solution would be to try to determine student qualities that go beyond what is reflected in the test scores. Some colleges already do this through essays, interviews, etc. but it might be possible to augment those practices further and in more systematic ways so students with other positive attributes such as creativity, practical knowledge, etc. are not overlooked. Robert Sternberg, an educational psychologist, has written a book about this called College Admissions for the 21st Century.
I agree that the SAT can be discriminatory in many aspects. It is also interesting to think how colleges do view student’s success on the exam, and personally I am glad that colleges are starting to do away with looking so intently at the scores because I do not believe it is a true indication of one’s academic success.
Personally, I did not score as high on the SAT exam as I would have hoped for/was expected to. Does that mean I am dumb? I do not think so. I was #3 in my graduating class and held a 4.0 GPA–for whatever reason, with much preparation and testing strategy, I could not figure out the exam to improve my score again and again. It is hard to have one single test determine how success one is–it just isn’t possible.
McKenzie, the point you raise is something I have been dealing with for a while. I’ve never been able to afford things like private tutors or test prep books, so the “discrimination” you talk about was very prevalent to me when I was taking the SATs in high school. I was able to get the exam fee waived because I qualified for the financial assistance, but I was astounded when I saw how much time and money my peers had been putting into preparing for the exam. And, like McKenzie said, most of the exam prep they were paying for was advice on how to take the test rather than teaching them the content that might be on it.
Currently, I am dealing with a similar issue with the GREs. There is no chance I will be able to afford taking the exam twice, and I definitely can’t afford practice books or a tutor. It’s a little frustrating knowing that, because I can’t afford this, I am at a slight disadvantage for scoring well on the exam. Unfortunately, grad schools will only get a score that determines how well I did on the exam – they won’t necessarily know how much or how little assistance I received outside of my own preparation for the exam, or how many times I took the exam. And I’m not an exception, this is common for so many students. I feel like either the way we evaluate students needs to change, or the materials to prepare for the exams needs to be accessible to everyone.
I completely agree with the points you made in this blog post. I really like the idea you brought up at the end of your post, “It’s hard to admit that my success on the test could be attributed to social or structural issues.” I think that most of us are aware that our success is attributed to the help we received and the amount of hours and work put in to something in order to see results, but it is definitely hard to admit that this test might have been, as you said, “practically designed” for us. If this test was designed for people of higher social class to succeed, does that mean that on the opposite side it is designed for people of lower social class to fail? Without the extra help that I received from tutors, who knows what I would have scored on the SAT. I had the means to provide myself with extra help and tools that would help me succeed, but many did not have this option. Without the knowledge of how to answer certain questions, which questions to skip, which questions to guess, does this put people in a lower social class in a position to fail?