Replies

Gee, I took the SAT before there WAS an essay section (and there was just Math and Verbal).

It was the SAT that got me into the university of my choice. My high school grades were mediocre at best. In fact I got my rejection letter telling me my grades were way below standard a week before my acceptance letter based on my SAT.

The fact that I was able to graduate in four years, I guess means that the SAT, back in the 60s was a better predictor of success than HS grades—or at least it was in my case.

But of course now we all know that meritocracy is a bad, racist thing.

I'm with you. When I first SAT prepped was in the mid '80s. Those of us teaching in smaller rural schools got fed up with low scores keeping students out of schools they were more than qualified for. No adversity scores or accommodations were available. So, a friend and I put together our own SAT prep course and raised scores, a lot. We did it the old fashioned way. We taught the test taking skills and filled in background so the students know how do excel.

Adaptations, affirmative action, and now adversity scores are all bad news. They help less qualified students at the expense of the best candidates. They don't insist students reach their full potential, as they've already been told that they have less potential than others. It extends to later in life, where folks who've met lower expectations often have lower personal standards and/or qualifications for their careers. It affects every one of us when we depend on them to excel at their jobs.