The move comes amid a debate over the tests' fairness, as well as the stresses of the ongoing pandemic.

Who else has a feeling this change is due to internal pressure that there aren't enough domestic applicants that can make the grades?

Gotta have some way to fight back against "Chi-com" influence

    • DetroitLolcat [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      While this is true, you have to compare the SAT/ACT to the criteria that will replace it such as grades, extracurriculars, personal essays, and legacy. All of those metrics outside of class rank are even more classist and racist than the SAT.

      It's not that the SAT is good (it isn't), but I do think there's a strong case for it being the lesser of two evils and that abolishing it is choosing the greater evil.

      • regul [any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        I think the College Board is pretty fucking evil.

      • crime [she/her, any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        I think having something that you sit down and do once kind of helps to round out shit like grades, essays, extracurriculars, etc. like the SAT/ACT are dogshit but it def helped me out as a kid with undiagnosed ADHD and autism and an after school job to have a test I could sit down and do once vs various semesters of missed schoolwork, teachers that hate me, projects, presentations, tests I couldn't study for, etc.

        Like it still sucks, and there's still a huge class and race gap for ACT/SAT scores, but IMO they're still at least marginally better at offering a level playing field than every other metric that American colleges use currently.

    • Lundi [none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I know this, this is clear, but then what about the median family income of the high schools of admitted students vs the median family income of those who are not admitted.