Clarence Page’s column (“By whose standard do we test true merit?” Op-Ed, Oct. 1) contained some false impressions of the SAT. For one thing, the SAT is not the only criterion colleges use in admissions, nor is it merely a test of test-taking skills or “filling in bubbles,” as anyone who has taken it can verify.
It is a rigorous test designed to ensure a good student-college match by indicating verbal and mathematical reasoning skills that enable students to do well at a given institution. It also helps colleges treat students fairly by providing objective, impartial indicators to balance the softer, more subjective admissions criteria of grades, essays and references.
Contrary to Mr. Page’s claim, it may even give African-Americans and Hispanics a slight advantage in college admissions because it overpredicts their college grades, meaning that it predicts higher grades than many of these students will receive.
Mr. Page may believe the claims of expensive coaching schools and test critics, but research shows that coaching schools do not produce dramatic results. On average, short-term programs (about 20 hours) improve scores 10 points on verbal, 15 on math. And longer programs (about 40 hours) improve scores 15 to 20 points on verbal, 20 to 30 on math. Students, however, experience a point of diminishing returns and very few gains after 20 or 30 hours. Such gains are available at no cost, since the best preparation for the SAT–and for college–is still a strong program of academic courses and extensive outside reading, starting as early as possible.
