Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Not being too educated about this, I'd like to learn more. These are
extremely serious charges that I hope require the highest standards
of proof – are you referring to a racist, misogynist status quo
within the College Board's internal ranks, or within private and
public universities themselves? This was unclear to me.
If someone wanted to begin educating themselves about this topic,
what resources (reports, reasoned opinions, etc) would people here
recommend?
“The SAT still promises something it can’t deliver: a way to
measure merit.” - Lani Guinier
Standardized tests are supposed to be neutral, value-free
assessments of how hard students work. The more students study, the
more seriously they take their education, the better they will
perform on these tests. In high-stakes settings, standardized tests
are used as primary determinants of student access to, or else
denial of, resources, opportunities, and spaces. The Scholastic
Assessment Test (SAT) is one such test. Ostensibly, the students
who work hardest will earn higher scores, and those scores will
give them an upper hand in the college admissions process. This
particular narrative neatly aligns with the illusion of America’s
meritocratic tradition: Those who work the hardest will reap the
greatest benefits, never mind structural inequality. But studies
have proven, time and again, that standardized tests are much
better at revealing things like household income, race, and level
of parental education than they are at predicting the success of
students in college classrooms.
Can you direct us to some of the examples that are good AND
standardized? I don't hear about BOTH too often.