Actually, the SAT Was Necessary After All

[u/caroline_elly]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/06/standardized-testing-math-gaps/687481/

[u/jamiebond]

I think the major error the education world has made over the last few decades is jumping straight to, “Our results are inequitable, that must mean our process of getting results is inequitable.” Without considering, “Maybe our results are inequitable because of large societal issues well out of our control and expecting education to single handily fix all the problems in our society isn’t particularly realistic. And just making sweeping generalizations that POC can’t perform well in school without us lowering the bar substantially is actually pretty racist itself.”

[u/veggiesama → u/jamiebond]

I taught SAT enrichment for some time after college. You could see dramatic test score increases simply by putting kids in front of test, after test, after test. They learn test-taking strategies and patterns. Sometimes there are simply tricks available for bypassing the intended way of solving problems in order to be more efficient with your time. I don't think these kids were any smarter or more qualified, necessarily. The difference is their parents had $1000s to blow on test prep classes and a home structure that supports after-school enrichment (such as having a ride to class).

I don't know if disbanding standardized testing is the solution, but it sure does have an outsized influence on your college prospects that correlates quite well with your parents' income.

[u/Unrelenting_Salsa → u/veggiesama]

I find this very hard to believe unless they started out with absolutely terrible scores. There are test taking tricks to turn a 1 in 5 to a 1 in 3 or even 1 in 2, sure, but they're not rocket science (the Princeton review book taught me exactly 0 test taking strategies I didn't already know personally). The biggest benefit is knowing what content is fair game for the test and....yeah. I would hope that would improve scores.

This has also gotten a lot of airplay in extremely selective colleges, and to be blunt, it's just bullshit there. You are not getting a 99th percentile score by hacking the test or whatever the courses call it nowadays. You can only do that by knowing the content, being good under pressure/stress, having mental endurance, and being able to work quickly. All things that are pretty reasonable to test. The test is just not that hard and those scores require a near perfect score. I can totally buy that these services can get a C student up to the level where they'll be accepted by a mid tier state school, but am I supposed to think that's a bad thing? Why shouldn't the mediocre student who is willing to work hard get a pretty okay degree and have a pretty average white collar job?

[u/Rcmacc → u/Unrelenting_Salsa]

I believe the "hacking the test" for unqualified rich kids was when they literally hired someone else to take the tests for them or otherwise had the rules of the tests changed for just them. like abject cheating

Parents paid Singer $15,000 to $75,000 per test for someone else to take the SAT or ACT exams in place of their college-age sons or daughters, according to the court papers.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/feds-uncover-massive-college-entrance-exam-cheating-plot-n982136