Posted on 05/31/2021 1:59:19 PM PDT by blam
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the announcement that the University of California will now join the “test-blind” movement and end the use of the SAT and ACT in its admissions decisions. Some have called for the change to increase diversity in the schools, particularly after California voters refused to change the long ban on affirmative action in education under state law.
Here is the column:
The Supreme Court will decide early next month whether to take a new case on the use of race in college admissions. For decades, the court has fractured on the issue and left an unintelligible morass. A challenge brought by Asian students at Harvard could bring clarity, including a possible rejection of the use of race as an admissions criterion.
However, the massive California university system has just taken an action that could make such challenges more difficult in the future. University of California President Janet Napolitano announced that the ten schools in the system will no longer base admissions on standardized tests — joining a “test-blind” admissions movement nationally.
Without standardized testing, it would be difficult to prove the weight given to race in admissions.
Advocates for greater diversity in admissions have long opposed the use of standardized tests as disfavoring minority applicants. Many have decried standardized testing as vehicles for white supremacy. Indeed, education officials like Alison Collins, vice president of the San Francisco Board of Education, have declared meritocracy itself to be racist.
Napolitano responded to such criticism with a Standardized Testing Task Force in 2019. Many people expected the task force to recommend the cessation of standardized testing. The task force did find that 59 percent of high school graduates were Latino, African-American or Native American but only 37 percent were admitted as UC freshman students. The Task Force did not find standardized testing to be unreliable or call for its abandonment, however.
Instead, its final report concluded that “At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, [University] GPA, and graduation.” Not only that, it found: “Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007 … Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines … In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority Students (URMs), who are first generation, or whose families are low-income.” In other words, test scores remain the best indicator for continued performance in college.
That clearly was not the result Napolitano or some others wanted. So, she simply announced a cessation of the use of such scores in admissions. The system will go from two years of “optional” testing to a “test-blind” system until or unless it develops its own test.
Ending standardized testing will have a notable impact on legal challenges to the use of race in college admissions. Last November, Californians rejected a resolution to restore affirmative action in college admissions.
The Supreme Court has issued a series of 5-4 decisions that have ruled both for and against such race criteria admissions — but even justices supporting such systems have expressed reservations. The author of the 2003 majority opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, said she expected “that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” That 25 years is about up.
Reports indicate that significant differences remain on such scores, particularly for Asian students. The Harvard Crimson reported that “Asian-American applicants to Harvard earned an average SAT score of 726. White applicants earned an average score of 713, Native American and Native Hawaiian applicants an average score of 658, Hispanic American applicants a score of 650, and African American applicants a score of 622.” Yet, during that same period, “Asian-Americans saw the lowest acceptance rate of any racial group.”
In Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the litigants cite a study finding that Asian Americans needed SAT scores that were about 140 points higher than white students; the gap with admitted African American and Hispanic students is even greater.
The Supreme Court has allowed race to be considered in overall admission decisions, but has stressed that it cannot be used as a determinative or dominant factor. Judicial reviews, therefore, often focused on the objective standardized scores to deduce the weight given to race. Most of us agree that admissions should be based on a holistic review of applicants and not just their scores or GPA. This includes achieving greater demographic, socio-economic, racial and other forms of diversity. However, standardized scores remain highly valuable as objective comparisons of all applicants to guarantee a system based on meritocracy, including within such groups.
In the Harvard case, the scores are particularly important because the litigants allege that subjective factors were systemically used to disfavor them on issues such as likability and personality. While the lower courts ruled for Harvard, the trial judge did note that there may have been bias in favor of minority admissions and encouraged Harvard to deal with such “implicit bias” while monitoring “any significant race-related statistical disparities in the rating process.” But what if there are no “statistical disparities” because there are no objective statistics?
The elimination of scores has a pronounced impact on students. While it will likely allow for greater diversity in admissions, it also removes a way for students to distinguish themselves in actual testing of their knowledge of math, English and other subjects. Yes, there are other ways to distinguish themselves, like community service and high school projects. Yet, as found by the UC task force, these tests do have a predictive value on success. Indeed, at a time when the United States is losing ground on math and science, the elimination of such testing could undermine our competitive position in a global economy; countries like China demand high levels of objective performance in areas like math and science.
There is an alternative. Rather than eliminate standardized scores due to the disparity in performance of racial groups, we should focus on improving the performance of minority high school students in these areas.
Testing results reflect a continuing failure of our public schools. The top-spending public school districts are also some of the worst-performing districts. New York topped the per capita spending, at $24,040 per kid. Yet, according to a 2019 study, over half of New York City public school kids cannot handle basic math or English. On tests, Asian kids shows a 74.4 percent proficiency in math, with a 66.6 percent proficiency for whites, 33.2 percent proficiency for Hispanics and 28.2 percent proficiency for African Americans.
Instead of addressing the failure to educate kids in these communities, the push is to get rid of the testing itself. The deficiencies will remain — but the ability to expose them will be gone.
Eliminating standardized scores will not erase true racial disparities in our educational system. Indeed, it may only exacerbate them.
Admitting kids (of whatever demographic group) with significantly lower academic qualifications leads (with rare exceptions) to one of two results: those kids end up at the bottom of their classes when grades come out, if they’re taking rigorous subjects, or those kids migrate to bullshit majors where everybody gets good grades since standards in those fields are virtually non-existent.
Or alternatively grade inflation across the board proceeds to the point where the average grade is an “A-” (that’s basically Harvard, by the way).
Will Eliminating Standard Tests cover for black failure ?
Not long ago there was a story about a young man who had, IIRC, passed 3 courses (presumably non-PE courses) in the 3 previous years ... which for THAT school was good enough to place him in the upper half of his class.
This got leaked and only THEN did it seem like they were finally gonna not socially promote him and graduate him!
That kind of school wide performance is not possible except that the school staff themselves just aren’t worth shit. Actual teachers teaching rather than civil servants babysitting should easily do much better.
The state is to a large extent wasting money on students that don’t graduate.
The state university should screen for success by all reasonable means.
Blacks are about 6% of California’s population. To have equal representation in a ~280,000 student system means about 18,000 black students in the system and admitting about 4,500 black students a year.
If California can’t annually produce 13,500 black high school graduates likely to graduate from the University of California system then California high school education needs a shake-up.
I would think that black families that rent and have a smart high school student might move to California to try to get in on the free UC tuition deal.
Perhaps UC graduates who teach in CA high schools should try to set up high school UC prep/recruitment clubs.
Everyone will be equally ignorant.
No another reason will be found for blaming whites (and to some extent Asians.).
There will only be change when they acknowledge the change starts with themselves ! Right now given all the liberal enablers, it hard to believe that will ever happen.
The goal seems to be making college enrollments look like the Baltimore Public School system. After the low end of the curve drops on or is limited to competitive sports teams, the remaining students can get on with life.
More money coming in, better TV exposure for the football and basketball teams, what more could you ask for? Almost sounds like Notre Dame.
Also good comments and I would add to yours that the minorities will blame white conservatives when the fault lies totally in the democrat camp.
They promote affirmative action. They promote giving loans to people that will never earn enough to repay them. They promote the underhanded thinking that blacks are incapable of helping themselves. They promote believing the unbelievable.
Would that it were true. They will be made into a guerrilla army within the United States, attacking Americans and American infrastructure whenever possible.
Education is racist! We must all be ignorant and stupid.
“Asian kids shows a 74.4 percent proficiency”
In NYC there are ‘Korean schools’ that teach their students the students’ next grade level material. ‘Korean school’ students study their subject matter twice.
Hey, why not just round Pi to 3.14?
Too many chiefs not enough indians?
A receding tide lowers all boats.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/baltimore-student-fails-classes-top-half
Indeed, education officials like Alison Collins, vice president of the San Francisco Board of Education, have declared meritocracy itself to be racist.I love it when they write themselves into Orwell's "1984":
It’s evident that Mr. Turley has never taught a Freshmen class where nearly 3/4s of them fail at putting a proper paragraph together as it directly relates to them writing academic papers.....
Nope. It will just make all of our kids that much dumber, which by the way, is the democrat’s plan. Dumb people are easier to control.
Arts student?
Heh ... didn’t catch that earlier.
Where once artist may have needed to know things to make art now all they need to know is how to barf on a canvas and sell it for thousands.
My son is a Senior Engineering student at USI. They have had an Engineering Dept. for only a bit over 5 years but it’s tough as nails.
Only slightly over 40% will end up with a degree and practically no one accomplishes it in 4 years. Needless to say it’s graduates are in high demand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.