RE: Resolution on the SAT

Pursuant to College By Laws (those governing College Council), I am writing to request that the following resolution be put on the agenda for the next College Council meeting:

Resolution on the SAT
For Submission to Pitzer College Council, Spring 2001

Whereas, the S.A.T. is at best an imperfect measure of student achievement; and
Whereas the S.A.T. has known racial, class and sex biases; and
Whereas the S.A.T. is a weak predictor of college success;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Pitzer College, beginning with the applications for the freshman class of 2002, will not require the S.A.T. as a criterion for admission.

This resolution is motivated by a deep-seated commitment to Pitzer's objective of promoting socially responsible education. Inasmuch as the SAT has known race, class and race biases, an important way that Pitzer College can affirm its own educational objectives is to banish the SAT as a criterion for admission. If the SAT were neutral with respect to race, class, and/or sex, then its use could be justified. But because the SAT has well-known and enduring race and sex biases (data on class biases are less clear), then the continued use of the SAT as a criterion for admission reinforces those biases and is clearly socially irresponsible.

Ethnic Biases

The race or ethnic biases may be seen in a table published by College Entrance Examination Board (National Report: College Bound Seniors, 1972-1995, Copyright by the College Entrance Examination Board) that is available on the Internet (at http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/ce/c9622c01.html).

The above figure shows sharp differences between all high school test-takers and "minority" test-takers in both the percentages of students taking the test and their average scores. Although the minority/non-minority gap has declined over the 18 years of data, the gap is large and persistent.

These disparities may be viewed by looking at the actual scores of White and minority test-takers (see Table 22-2, attached). In 1976, the average verbal scores for Black and Mexican American students were 332 and 371, respectively, whereas the average score for Whites was 451. The difference between Blacks and Whites was 119 points, more than one standard deviation (the SD for the verbal test, in 1976, was 110).

In 1995, the last year for which data were readily available, the average verbal scores for Black and Mexican American students were 356 and 376, respectively, whereas the average score for Whites was 448. Although the Black/White gap narrowed to 92 points, this was still .81 standard deviation units (the verbal standard deviation in 1995 was 113 points).

Sex Biases

A similar case can be made for the disparities in the scores of males and females. The following figure illustrates this disparity for verbal scores (taken from the same source as above).

Although the sex differences are not large (averaging 10-15 points), they are very consistent over more than a 20-year period. Even more dramatic are the sex differences on the math scores, as depicted in the following figure.

If we are unaware of consistent biases of race/ethnicity and sex, then the use of a criterion such as the SAT would be excusable. But in the context of our cognizance of such systematic biases, the continued use of the test of inexcusable, particularly for a college that promotes "social responsibility."

Taking the Lead

As you will undoubtedly recall, this issue was raised at a College Council meeting last Fall (at the session where Arnaldo Rodriguez provided information and answered questions). Since that time, Richard Atkinson, President of the University of California, proposed the banning of the SAT. His bold proposal is one that has generated considerable debate and controversy. (News clippings and editorials, pro and con, appear on my website at http://bernard.pitzer.edu/~hfairchi/courses/Spring2001/SATStudy.htm).

This is an issue that will continue to generate debate at UC and other institutions of higher education in the ensuing months and years. It is my belief that the banning of the SAT is inevitable, as it is the correct and just thing to do. Pitzer College can be a follower in this debate, or it can be a leader. It is my hope that the proposed resolution can be passed this semester¹, or early next semester, and we can be on record of making a definitive change in our admissions policies that consciously eschews criteria that are known to have race/ethnic and sex biases.

Pros and Cons

A proposal of this nature is necessarily open to a great deal of debate. A study that I conducted last semester (results are available on a page of my website, noted above), revealed a good deal of polarization among faculty, students and staff on this issue. As noted in an op-ed piece that I published in the Los Angeles Times (copy attached), however, Atkinson's proposal may have nudged campus opinion in the direction of being more favorable toward the ban of the SAT as a criterion for admissions. That said, I offer, in conclusion, the following "Con" and "Pro" statements regarding the proposed resolution.
 

Con Statements	Pro Statements
To abolish the SAT would weaken the image of Pitzer, possibly creating the view that Pitzer is "less rigorous."	The use of the SAT is a false indicator of an institution's "rigor." Instead, the average SAT scores of Pitzer students should be seen as an indicator of the proportion of students who enjoy class/ethnic and/or sex privileges. These privileges are unearned.
To abolish the SAT would lower the quality of students who are admitted to Pitzer.	The SAT is an inadequate measure of student quality. Pitzer already admits over 60% of applicants. To abolish the SAT would likely increase the number of applicants, thereby necessitating more selectivity, not less.
To abolish the SAT would leave the Admissions Office without the means for judging who is, and who is not, to be admitted to Pitzer.	The abolishment of the SAT would force the Admissions Office to develop and emphasize alternative criteria for admissions. These may include class rank, GPAs, letters of recommendation, self-statements, and interviews. These more 'holistic' criteria require a deeper look at each applicant, and a possibly more valid evaluation of applicants' talents and suitability to attend Pitzer.

Thank you for considering this request. I look forward to an engaging debate the advances our mutual objectives of providing a socially responsible educational environment for all who live, study and work at Pitzer College.
 

Sincerely,

[original signed]

Halford H. Fairchild, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology and Black Studies

cc:  Arnaldo Rodriguez (Vice President of Admissions & Financial Aid)
       Alan Jones (Dean of Faculty, 2001-2003)

¹   According to Pitzer By Laws, any proposal that substantially alters existing policies or procedures must be discussed at a meeting of the College Council, but not voted on until a subsequent meeting.  Inasmuch as this proposal was initially made last Fall, it could conceivably be voted on at the next meeting of the College Council.  Alternatively, it could be argued that the proposal does not "substantially alter" existing policies and procedures because the SAT plays an admittedly minor role in Pitzer admissions.  On the other hand, a strict imposition of our By Laws could require a vote on this resolution at a meeting subsequent to the next meeting, and we can either schedule that vote for the first College Council meeting of the Fall semester, or we can be more assertive and schedule a special meeting of the College Council before the end of the current semester in order to record a vote on this resolution.