We know that the history of standardized testing rests in a laudable effort to democratize access to the nation's colleges and universities. However, when the results of the test appear to foster inequities in access, and the test results are not being or cannot be explained to the test taker, then the test itself becomes suspect. It begins to be perceived by the public as less of an opportunity to demonstrate ability and more as a gate to keep them out. I am not saying that testing is not useful I believe it is. But we cannot forget that testing is not only big politics, it is also big business.
Votes are at stake, as well as a good deal of money.
Tests are sold and bought, and educational institutions have not always look-ed under the hood before making the purchase. Finally, whatever we do with the SAT I, or with other tests at the K-12 or university level, should not distract us from the far more important challenge we have as a society that is to achieve some real clarity about the qualities and levels of achievement we aspire to for our young. A 1300 score on the SAT means, in the end, very little. What we are after is the graduation from high school and the entrance into higher education of students who have deep quantitative, analytic, communication, and citizenship skills. What we are after are constructive ways to hold teachers and the colleges and universities that prepare them, schools, and government ac-countable for creating learning environments that enable young people to reach those high standards.