SAT as Sacred Cow, Letters

Dear Editor,
    This letter has been written in response to an article written by
    Professor Halford Fairchild, from the opinion section of the Daily
    Bulletin.

    Certainly, many would agree with Professor Fairchild's belief that the
    SAT is a biased tool that causes race, sex, and class inequalities.
    However, taking the argument one step further, one might ask what
    happens when a white, upper-middle class male takes the test, and
    underperforms. Shouldn't this individual have been the one with the
    most advantage for this particular exam? Who is this test supposed to
    be "written" for? Professor Fairchild does discuss the limited
    realistic uses of a test attempting to measure one's aptitude and
    achievement. However, he does not mention that what makes this test
    even more outrageous is the fact that a 3-hour exam decides the future
    of the test-taker for the next 6-8 years after the exam, regardless of
    race, sex, and class. People applying for scholarships, to graduate
    schools, or even applying for jobs & internships are also judged by
    their SAT or GRE scores. What now comes into question is, if even
    amidst the specific racial, sexual and class issues surrounding the
    SAT, how do we even get past the fact that it is simply a barrier to
    everyone?
Jon Saltzman
Published in the Daily Bulletin, March 3, 2002.

In “SAT: the sacred cow of higher education” Halford Fairchild does a
wonderful job of exploring the multi-faceted racial aspects of the SAT.
As Fairchild suggests, the test does in fact reinforce individual,
cultural, scientific, and institutional racisms. The SAT is simply
another form of White privilege. This is why those employed in the field
of higher education are so reluctant to dispose of the SAT as college
criterion; these individuals seek to continue the practices of White
privilege, which identify non-whites as inferior.

Students who can afford to take expensive SAT classes have a better chance
of entering college while those who do not have the money must simply
except low scores. These financially inept students must then look to
lowly classed institutions and community colleges for any hopes of higher
education. Realizing this, we also know that Blacks, and other minority
groups, lag far behind Whites economically. Thus, the SAT is meant for
middle to upperclass Whites who can take the test, perform highly, and
enter into selective colleges. Where does this leave other ethnic groups?
These groups are left far behind in a position in which they’ll never
quite catch up to their White counterparts. Let’s get rid of the SAT
nationally and really stand up as a nation that presents fair
opportunities for all people. A country that does more than simply
promote Whites and their privilege.

Natasha Nalls

Dear Editor,
    While I agree that the SAT is an unfair "indicator" of scholastic
    attitude, it seems like this is a catch-22. There needs to be an
    academically rooted standard to measure intelligence. However as
    Fairchild himself stated, one may never exist. So what do admissions
    officers do in the mean time? The standard of education varies from
    school to school. An "A" has a different meaning from school to
    school, and can differ with each teacher. A viable solution, even if
    temporary, needs to be found before the SAT's are eradicated
    permanently.
Urmi Sheth

Dear Editor,
I am writing in response to the article published on Sunday, February 24,
2002, entitled "SAT: the sacred cow of higher education." Having heard
many arguments both for and against the use of the SAT, I find it
difficult to take a stand either way. Of course it is easy to take a
stand against the use of a tool that is inherently racist; what is more
difficult is envisioning the replacement for the exam. In a televised
debate, Dr. Fairchild has suggested the use of more qualitative measures
to evaluate applicants for college. I feel, however, that unless we could
produce a society free of racism, sexism, etc. altogether, this option
would prove just as damaging. Evaluation based on grades fails to
eliminate any discrimination; an A at one school may be comparable to a C
at another and thus using these grades for measure would, I believe,
produce many of the same results. I just feel like there needs to be a
viable option in place before we can completely eradicate the SAT.
Banning the use of SAT also introduces several additional questions: are
we to then ban any method of evaluation that produces racially-distinct
results? If the new test developed for the University of California
produces a group of applicants that are largely Asian-American will we
try again? And if the group is largely African-American? What will be
considered an "acceptable" breakdown of the proportions of applicants by
race? As earlier mentioned, I do feel that Dr. Fairchild raises a valid
point with the SAT, and I think that time is being well-spent searching
for alternatives. Equally important, however, is to keep in mind the
reality of how our education system was developed and that we do need to
go further back than the secondary education level to address the
inherent discrimination within this system. The new test being developed
by the University of California cannot possibly accurately test the
knowledge gained by high school students, because there is too much
disparity here. Perhaps the time and money being put into this project
would be better spent improving the conditions from which the disparity
stems. Finally, I think it is very important to remember that while the
SAT is one tool used to measure an applicant's merit, it is not the only
tool. A "good" college applicant is expected to have received good grades
in classes, have shown a level of motivation throughout their scholastic
career, show a dedication to serving the community, and demonstrate
developed personal skills. While the debate continues regarding the SAT,
these other qualities should still be emphasized to students of all ages
because they will contribute to their future in education and life. It is
important not to get so caught up in the relative fairness of this test
such that we forget to prepare our students in all the other pertinent
areas.
Jaida Butler

Dear Daily Bulletin,
I am writting in response to your article " SAT: the sacred cow of higher
education" by Halford Fairchild. While Professor Fairchild makes some very
good points i think it is important to recognize that the UC's are not
really dropping the SAT's merley finding a better standardized test. I
believe Professor Fairchild's view to be that the SAT is a "racially
tainted barrier to higher education" and that it should be abolished, not
replaced with another standardized test.
It is my belief that SAT's scores merley show the racial disparity in
our society, it is not the SAT that is the problem it is the racism
prevalent in our society. I do not believe that the SAT is the "sacred
cow" of higher education especially where i am a student, consequently the
same institution of higher learning where Professor Fairchild is a
teacher. The SAT's are a big issue and I think it is wonderful that the
Daily Bulletin has brought it to the attention of their readers.
Sincerely,
Monica Tirado

Dear Editor,
Professor Fairchild raises some good points on why the SATs should be
dropped. I completely agree that the majority of the material that is
expected to be known on the SAT is not taught in high school, and that
this test also continues to produce group differences having to do with
race and class. Kids who attend private school have a better chance of
being able to afford classes that teach you how to get around the SAT and
how to take the test. They are also more likely to be able to retake the
test again several times. Kids who attend public school or who live in
lower class neighborhoods are not as likely to be able to do either. I
attended private school and my family is considered to be middle class. I
was able to take a prep class and take the test twice, while some of my
friends who are considered lower class, live in Compton, and attended
public school could not afford to do either. Also, if there are classes
that are being taught to teach a student how to get around, or beat the
SAT, doesn't that pose as even more of a disadvantage to people who cannot
afford those classes? And because of these classes, is the test really
considered to be accurate and effective if students are able to learn how
to cheat the test and get a higher score? It seems obvious that the SAT
is a discriminatory test which then holds some influence on the type of
people who are admitted into college. There should be some kind of
alterior test that will equalize the oppertunity for students who want to
continue furthering their education by going to college.
- Brandi Mills

Dear Editor,
Although I feel colleges need more than just GPA’s and a list of extra curricular activities to assist them in choosing a student for admission, I feel like the SAT’s are an aspect that can be done without. I agree with Dr. Fairchild’s point that SAT’s bring about unequal opportunity between different races which automatically puts them at a disadvantage for college acceptance. People have said , “if one is motivated enough there should be no reason to do poorly on the SAT’s”, this however, can not always be assumed. I have a friend who was more than motivated to do well on his SAT’s and get accepted into a well distinguished school. Unfortunately, because of his families position , he was unable to reach this goal. Everyday after school, my friend had half an hour to get to work. Four hours later, he’d have to rush home to relieve the babysitter of work so he could take over. Between getting his “education”, working to help support his family, and babysitting his siblings, my friend never had the opport
Adaeze Anyanwu

Dear Editors,

In response to Halford Fairchild's article regrading the SATs, I
believe
that the decision made by the University of California is a monumental one
in challenging a system filled with flaws and biases. While their decision
to drop the SAT is a huge one, this is a dangerous time for the movement
if it is to catch on nation wide. By making this decision the University
of California's admission practices are going to be closely example to see
if others want to follow the same path. The University of California must
set a strong and organized example and avoid as being seen as the "problem
child" of the west coast. To further advance this movement their needs to
be an east-coast counterpart, if this happens then the movement can be
walking with two feet and not create an east vs west coast battle.
Andrew Poon
Published in the Daily Bulletin, March 3, 2002

Dear Editor,
I am a student at Scripps College writing in response to the article in
Sunday's paper written by Halford Fairchild. I agree that the SAT should
be banned from admissions in universities and colleges. Not only is this
test racially unfair but also it does not always test the college
performance abilities of those who do have the opportunity to do well on
the SATs. I wonder, though, what a proper replacement would be. How are
we to determine whether a student is capable of succeeding in college if
we do not have some form of standardized testing that everyone has to
take? That, I feel, is still the big question to be answered and one that
Fairchild has not adequately addressed. When we can make each student's
grades and educational opportunities generally equal, then I am all for
the banning of the SAT. Until then, I think there's still work to be
done.
Erin Robertson
Scripps College, Senior

To Whom It May Concern,

   My response to Professor Fairchild's opinion in this
past Sunday's bulletin is somewhat in the middle. I am a
freshman at Pitzer College and having to hear about the
SATs like this again causes me to reminisce about when I
had to take them.
   Taking the SAT and receiving back my scores honestly
shot my self-esteem to hell. Throughout my whole academic
career I put up good grades and I consider it a miracle to
be enrolled at Pitzer. I had done so well on all the
practice SATs that I didn't think I should have studied for
them. I also thought that if the SATs were supposed to
test me on what I already knew, then studying and learning
new material that would be on the test was pointless and a
waste of time.
   My scores were ok, I got 1000. Maybe it was from me
being burned out from taking so many standardized tests by
then (and near the same times as well), I really don't
know, but I thought I would have done better than that
considering that I've always done well in school. I took
the test again and got a lower score.   Right then I was
tired of the test and began to question my intelligence.
   Although I got into more than half of all the colleges I
applied to, I didn't appreciate that this test made me
question my academic skill. High school seniors have
enough pressure on them, they really don't need this test
as something they'll think of as a major deciding factor in
their future. It doesn't help much either if the test
discriminates against students who don't receive the same
opportunities as those who do extremely well.
   Basically all I'm trying to say is that if the SATs are
going to stay, then there needs to be some alterations on
it in which the testing material makes every test taker on
the same exact level. If that means every high school,
every elementary school if you want to go further back,
must have the same curriculum, then maybe that's what
should happen.
Just a thought...
                                     Connie Mendoza

In response to Halford Fairchild’s article “SAT: the sacred cow of higher education”, I feel as though while he makes valid points in the discriminatory nature of the test, he did not cover a vital issue that goes with eliminating the SAT. The makers of the SAT, the Educational Testing Service, is one behemoth of a private enterprise. They have a stranglehold on the standardized test arena, and I strongly doubt that they would ever want to loosen their grip on such a lucrative market. I am surprised that Professor Fairchild did not address this, since one of the reasons for the dominance of the SAT has to do with money. The admissions officers can easily look at the SAT scores, and quickly throw out applications where the scores are simply too low, rather than giving them the time of day that they should deserve. The colleges save time and money, and the ETS in turn makes incredible sums of money by virtually requiring college-bound students to take the test if they wish to get into top ranked schools. The test preparatory courses that have become widespread also stand to benefit greatly from the SAT. The ETS has rooted itself firmly in the process of achieving higher learning, and it will be quite tough to change that while the company has their big pockets of influence. The people that get hit badly in this situation are those who get lower scores, and don’t get into top schools, and in turn don’t get better jobs. It’s not likely that many pay any heed to the disgruntled rejects. If the UC system does employ a new test, it would also incur some problems with the newly implemented standard for measure, as they would not have much historical data to compare the results with. I feel as though while the SAT may have its inherently racist background, it has now become a money issue. Greed perpetuates all kinds of racism and discrimination, and I feel that making money is more the topic at hand. They would want to keep the money in their hands, and not in anyone else’s. Perhaps we should look into the monopoly that the ETS holds as well.

-Dennis Chang

My name is Jameela Hammond and I'm a freshman at Pitzer College. I think
that what Prof. Fairchild is trying to do is wonderful because he's the
voice for those minority students. When I say minorities, that's
everyone, the SATs are unfair and are racist. It's proven to be very
difficult for different ethnic groups. The type of SAT questions that are
on the test, have nothing to do with what we learn in school. So why do
they have those questions? Why aren't we taught what's going to be on the
test? And why must we have to pay so much money to get high scores?! In
a way, you ARE buying your scores. So the people that are less fortunate,
are at a disadvantage. Prof. Fairchild sees the many problems with the
SATs. There needs to be other things to go on for admitting students such
as the essays that students have to write or even going on GPA (which can
sometimes be corrupted). Pitzer College should try banning it and see how
it goes. If it doesn't work as planned, than they can always bring it
back.

Thank you,
Jameela Hammond

Dear Editor,

Despite Fairchild's furtive attempts to discredit the legitimacy of
the SAT, he has mistaken several underlying principles of the test. The
noble goal of equalizing educational opportunity is unrealistic.
Therefore, on would assume that the biases of education towards race,
class, and gender are inherent in high school curricula. The SAT is a
universal tool to escape the possible injustices of an inferior education.
In addition, an SAT score does not attempt to show that any one group is
more intelligent than another. It simply measures a person's ability to
reason and solve problems from various angles. I understand that any
universal testing system cannot be perfect, yet the SAT is an opportunity
for all people, disadvantaged or not, to show that their mind is capable
and prepared for future challenge. Aaron Koles
Published in the Daily Bulletin, Sunday March 3, 2002

                    Daily Bulletin, March 6, 2002, Page A8
                   Some learn easily, but others do not
                   Regarding the guest column, "SAT: the sacred cow of higher education," (Feb. 24):
                   Halford Fairchild's premise concerning intellectual capacity being "virtually" unlimited is
                   preposterous. Even the slightest subjective observation in the classroom or in the world
                   around us would obviate such a premise. One of the reasons some of us "drop out" along
                   the way is due to our ability to observe that some of us are better at "studies" than others
                   of us, so what's the point of competing when we're not even in the game.

                   Some of us have to study really hard to stay even with those who hardly have to study at
                   all in the fundamental academics. Some of us can study until we're "blue in the face" and
                   find it impossible to stay even or to stop falling further and further behind. Memory of
                   processes and procedures in some disciplines are just beyond us or would require so
                   much effort that we haven't the self-discipline or inclination to make the sacrifices.

                   We've seen either ourselves or someone else do all the cliches, "crack the books, burn the
                   midnight oil or join study groups," and all to no avail. We know we don't belong and
                   usually decide to stop trying. Some times we "hang in there" and slide by by cheating or
                   some other "shenanigans." All the time we know that we're not suited for the academic
                   life, mostly because we don't have the genes. If we do have the genes, very little is likely
                   to stop us because when we see it, we get it.

                   Even the really gifted minds recognize there are limits. Einstein admitted he owed his own
                   success to not trying to do those things he couldn't do. Most of the physics majors are in
                   physics because they couldn't handle the upper levels of theoretical math. Even the big
                   math minds can't understand Stephen Hawking. (One said he did, but didn't sound
                   convincing.)

                   We all are burdened with limits, and we usually discover fairly early on what they are and
                   don't delude ourselves with totally unrealistic expectations. When the problem is
                   presented to us, we discover that we can do it with a reasonable amount of effort or we
                   can't. SAT is a pretty good way of having something to point to and say, "I have it," or "I
                   don't have it." Then, get on with your life.
                   JACK W. FARLEY
                   Rancho Cucamonga