Public schools aren't the ones that are prepping 12 year olds for the SATs, it's prep schools that are doing so. I think that this is a core issue to the whole debate. The fact that you can prepare for an aptitude test is absurd (that's part of the reason why SAT no longer stands for "Scholastic Apptitude Test"). The fact that there are testing companies that guarntee point increases if you take their $200 training courses leads to the rich scoring higher. Say what you like about the fairness of race-based admissions, but when California eliminated its affirmitive action policies it dealt a significant blow to the poor.
I think that the propsal to eliminate the SAT is an excellent idea. It is an extremely biased exam, and its totally unreasonable that we should use it to judge the merit of students. If its an unfair measure then do away with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Public schools aren't the ones that are prepping 12 year olds for the SATs, it's prep schools that are doing so. I think that this is a core issue to the whole debate. The fact that you can prepare for an aptitude test is absurd (that's part of the reason why SAT no longer stands for "Scholastic Apptitude Test"). The fact that there are testing companies that guarntee point increases if you take their $200 training courses leads to the rich scoring higher. Say what you like about the fairness of race-based admissions, but when California eliminated its affirmitive action policies it dealt a significant blow to the poor.
I think that the propsal to eliminate the SAT is an excellent idea. It is an extremely biased exam, and its totally unreasonable that we should use it to judge the merit of students. If its an unfair measure then do away with it.