RSS
Home
A perspective on the SAT from France
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Usually I write about stuff that's happening to me in France or that I observe over here that I think might interest people. However, for several years as a member of the Society of Professional Journalists and many years as a Bay Area psychology teacher, I wrote about educational issues. I still get the bug to write about issues like standardized tests and college admissions, particularly admissions to the University of California. Here is a commentary about the SAT and UC admissions that I wrote which appeared in yesterday's Contra Costa Times.
Ever since 1996, when affirmative action was outlawed under Proposition 209 in California, the University of California has been looking for ways to increase the diversity of the system's flagship universities (Berkeley and UCLA) without running afoul of the law. Unsuccessfully.
A recent University of Pennsylvania law review article by Professor Kimberly West-Faulcon might give AA proponents new ammunition.
West-Faulcon makes a compelling case that Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act overrides California state law banning affirmative action in college admissions. West-Faulcon argues that public universities must affirmatively balance admissions by race if two conditions exist. First, the public institution has lower-than-average minority admissions rates and second, the university is unable to justify the degree to which it relies on SAT scores to select an entering class.
The results of West-Faulcon's law review analysis reveal that "the racial disparities in admissions" to UCLA and Berkeley are "of sufficient statistical significance to make a prima facie case of Title VI disparate impact." The rate of African-American and Latino admissions went from higher than average before 209 to lower than average after it went into effect.
Disparate numbers of admits by race alone however, are not necessarily a sufficient justification for invoking Title VI protections for minorities. West-Faulcon writes:
"If a university's admissions criteria — such as the SAT — are fair and valid mechanisms for distinguishing among the pool of high-school students who apply to that institution, racial disparities in admissions are simply an accurate reflection of the lesser academic qualifications of African-Americans and Latinos."
After reviewing appropriate data, however, the author concludes that anti-affirmative action laws can be attacked through the backdoor by going after the SAT. Here's why.
First, underrepresented minorities (URM's) score on average about 300 points lower than whites and Asians on the SAT, which leads to the exclusion of many members of those groups at the elite universities.
Second, the SAT does a poor job predicting how students will do once they get to college. According to West-Faulcon:
"The Educational Testing Service (ETS), the manufacturer of the SAT, reports that a high-school student's SAT score explains approximately 13 percent of the variance in first-year college grades, less than would be explained if universities relied on high-school grades alone. SAT critics point to the ETS's own studies as well as institution-specific studies to support their view, ... that the SAT adds little predictive value to admissions decisions and is a weak predictor of graduation rates."
While public universities might invoke Title VI and directly reinstitute AA by giving URM's admissions' breaks, that action would certainly end up in the courts. A more circuitous, but likely just as effective way to increase the numbers of URM's and probably avoid legal challenges, would be for colleges to eliminate the SAT requirement.
Whether large university systems will begin to eliminate the SAT requirement is, of course, an open question.
What is clearer is that universities interested in increasing diversity will certainly begin to consider a SAT-free admissions policy.
Related Articles:
Comments
