Because You SAT Down and ACTed

By Neha Shabeer, Sophomore, Ashland High School
The pros and cons of standardized tests
Issue Date: 
April, 2017
Article Body: 

While the Class of 2017 has recently concluded many stress-filled days of SAT preparation, campus tours and college applications, the Class of 2018 is now beginning the anxiety-ridden process of standardized testing—the SAT I, SAT II (subject tests) and ACT.
Background
The SAT I Reasoning Test, formerly known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, was created in 1926 by a nonprofit group of universities and other educational organizations called the College Board. The purpose of creating the SAT was to have a standard exam for universities to assess college-bound seniors creating a classless meritocracy for college acceptance (Time Magazine). The SAT II: Subject Test, formerly known as Achievement Tests, was founded in 1937 by the College Board for colleges to consider students’ strengths in select subjects (Time). The SAT’s counterpart, the ACT, formerly known as the American College Testing, was created in 1959 as competition for the SAT’s two-decade long monopoly on college entrance tests.
With the implementation of the new SAT in March 2016, more schools have been scrutinizing their testing policies.
Pros
Today, the SAT is considered more prestigious and more widely accepted in colleges on the two coasts, while the ACT has its niche in Southern and Midwestern schools (Time). According to the College Board and ACT, over 1.9 million students in the Class of 2015 took the ACT and 1.7 million students took the SAT. The pros of such assessments are that they combat high school grade inflation in college admissions, keep students and schools accountable, are objectively graded, provide school data for federal grants, and supply data within sub-groups. The thought behind the exams is benevolent, but there are many flaws with its current structure.
Cons
The SAT is very ineffective in factoring in personal circumstances since it is administered on the same day at the same time across the country. It does not account for students’ progress, personal circumstances or socioeconomic background that might affect students’ scores. The SAT Reasoning Test is only administered once a month between the months of October and June and SAT II Subject Tests are only offered during specific months depending on the subject (College Board). Due to strict college application deadlines and cancellation fees, it is often not possible for students to reschedule test dates due to financial reasons or even mild sicknesses when one likely will not test their best.
For example, if a student is planning to take the SAT Biology M exam in January, but falls ill to a cold and wants to postpone the test, the next opportunity to take the test would be in May. Since one does not need to be on bed rest with a common cold, this student would most probably still take the exam even when they are not feeling their best leading to scores that do not best reflect their capabilities.
Additionally, as a timed test, the test favors quick, mediocre students rather than slow, brilliant students. There are many stories of students who slack in school that get high SAT scores and hard-working students in school who receive average scores (Washington Post). The rigid time constraint often causes SAT preparation to be about knowing the “tricks” of the test rather than understanding the actual material. This automatically gives students from a wealthier background that can invest in tutors and prep books such as the Princeton Review or Kaplan an advantage compared to students from a low-income household. Furthermore, the SAT puts students in a pressurized environment that does not value skills, such as creativity, leadership, compassion, integrity, or persistence. Test expert and tutor at the Princeton Review, Edward Carroll, even said, “The SAT is a very flawed test if you expect it to reveal much about student content skill or personal study and performance ability.”
Students vs. Students
The use of the SAT to create national percentiles pits students against each other and causes them to try to outperform each other rather than working to do the best of their abilities. Students can receive good scores but still be unhappy due to their percentile rank. Factors students cannot control such as where they live matter as well! Juniors who take the Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (PSAT/NMSQT) in Massachusetts must get much higher scores to be in the running for the National Merit Scholarship than students in places like Wyoming that have lower mean scores (PrepScholar). This furthers the competitive aspect of the test rather than quantifying personal knowledge.

Admission Anxiety
Although anxiety comes from taking the test, a lot of confusion and anxiety comes from how colleges use test scores while evaluating applications. With a surge in college applications in recent years caused by more jobs requiring higher education and students applying to more schools at a time, admissions officers are bombarded with applications to read (Forbes). Consequently, SAT scores are used as a quick, easy way to cut down the applicant pool and choose which applications to truly focus on. On the other hand, over 900 colleges and universities across the country have become test-optional or test-flexible by using high school GPA (grade point average), class rank, extracurricular activities, and community service instead of standardized test scores to evaluate students (FairTest). This diversifies the campus with minority and low-income students who usually do not perform as well on standardized testing and rewards diligent, hardworking students throughout their high school career (NPR). Examples of test-optional schools are Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Smith College, and George Washington University.
Stress on Schools
Regardless of these options, students, parents and high-ranking schools will inevitably keep putting stress on standardized tests. The common core curriculum in each state is different and due to President Obama’s Every Student Succeeds Act, teachers need to teach material that ensures students’ success on annual state-mandated benchmark exams (Department of Education (DOE)). Success on these tests promises funding from President Obama’s Race to the Top program, so it is critical for individual schools and states as a whole to do well (CNN).
Therefore, teachers need to first focus on teaching state-mandated curriculum that often doesn’t leave extra time to cover extra material. Unfortunately this leaves many students in a lurch when common core isn’t in line with topics on the SAT Subject Tests. For example, plant structure and animal behavior were taken out of the Massachusetts Biology curriculum but is a key topic on the SAT Biology E/M test, an important test for many students applying for science majors to show their interest and expertise in the subject (DOE, College Board). This leaves students who want to achieve high scores on a path of self-learning complex topics and again disadvantages students without resources to do so.
I personally believe the cons of standardized testing outweigh the pros. I look forward to witnessing the reform of college applications as the test-optional and test-flexible culture grows and becomes the norm. For more about the world through my eyes, keep reading my monthly column :)