Orwell Award Announcement SusanOhanian.Org Home


[Susan notes: Vintage Gardner. Mr. Camera was foolish to think he could have the last word.]

Submitted to Education Week but not published
07/26/2006

To the editor




Wayne Camara, the vice president of research for the College Board, takes me to task in his July 12, 2006, letter to the editor for daring, in my recent Commentary, to question the continued use of the nationís gatekeeper to college ("UnSATisfactory: Why Educationís Most Famous Test Fails the Test," June 14, 2006). He does so by spinning the evidence about the SATís coachability, predictive value, and indispensability.



Mr. Camara begins by citing 10 peer-reviewed studies showing that coaching results in an increase of only 8 to 15 points on the SATís verbal section, and only 15 to 23 points on the math section. He maintains that these results are proof that the effects of coaching are insignificant. What he fails to mention is that these improvements confer an important competitive edge on applicants at a time when the entire purpose of the SAT is to separate students out. This is the legacy of the Army Alpha tests from World War I.



Mr. Camara then zeroes in on the Bates College study I cite, characterizing it as an anomaly. In fact, other colleges that have made the SAT optional have reported similar results in terms of cumulative grades and graduation rates. He tries to divert attention from this inconvenient fact by arguing that colleges are free to use both grades and test scores. Of course they are, but four-year grades and SAT scores do not measure the same thing. Criterion-referenced instruments and norm-referenced instruments are designed with different purposes in mind. As a result, inferences are not interchangeable.



Having run out of red herrings, Mr. Camara finally throws in the classic ďindispensabilityĒ argument. He claims that, in the absence of a national curriculum and national standards, the SAT offers the only objective datum available to admissions officers. The SAT may be the cheapest and fastest way of assessment, but it is hardly the only defensible way to judge applicants. They can exhibit learning through such means as research papers and projects, mathematical problems and applications, and oral presentationsóall measured by the establishment of clear rubrics.



The SAT has too long held sway over the college-admissions process by engaging in a series of guileful pronouncements. Itís time to debunk the myth about what the test really measures. The changes in its name over the years are an indication that its designers themselves are utterly confused.



Walt Gardner


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.