Great piece. Tate's case for more rigorous testing is good. But one piece of his argument does not hold up.
He says the SAT is too easy and doesn't serve its purpose of differentiating for many top schools. But those same top schools just voluntarily brought the SAT back after years of going test-optional. You don't reinstate a requirement that is not doing its job. Their own behavior contradicts his claim.
What he might mean is that the test loses precision at the very top, where a 1580 and a 1500 are genuinely hard to tell apart. That is a fair point. But the SAT was never designed to carry admissions decisions by itself. It has always been one signal among many. Arguing that it fails to do a job it was never given is not such a strong critique.
Great piece. Tate's case for more rigorous testing is good. But one piece of his argument does not hold up.
He says the SAT is too easy and doesn't serve its purpose of differentiating for many top schools. But those same top schools just voluntarily brought the SAT back after years of going test-optional. You don't reinstate a requirement that is not doing its job. Their own behavior contradicts his claim.
What he might mean is that the test loses precision at the very top, where a 1580 and a 1500 are genuinely hard to tell apart. That is a fair point. But the SAT was never designed to carry admissions decisions by itself. It has always been one signal among many. Arguing that it fails to do a job it was never given is not such a strong critique.
The Qataris blocking their exposure!