The crowd that hates standardized testing, calling it racist and unfair, was riding high for several years, as school after school dropped the tests as admission requirements. But then things turned around after the end of the Covid mania. Administrators realized that the tests really were useful in figuring out which students could and could not handle the academic work. Now the testing opponents are angry again.
In today’s Martin Center article, I look at the controversy.
One of the test opponents, Miriam Pawel, made a splash with a New York Times piece where she argued that universities must resist the pressure to restore testing requirements. So what if lots of faculty members say that the no-test regime has led to large numbers of students who aren’t close to having college-level ability — without tests, schools can be more “inclusive.” That’s what matters.
I point out that for every student who is admitted, another must be rejected. Since each individual is unique, there is no reason to think that there is anything gained by favoring some students merely on account of race.
Furthermore, the “inclusiveness” obsession can lead to mismatch: students who look good based on their records at weak high schools, but who flounder at prestigious colleges.
Universities ought to stop worrying about diversity and strive for homogeneity — that is, enrolling students who are close to equal in academic ability and desire. Their ancestry isn’t relevant.
And there is recent research showing that standardized tests help schools admit students who have a high chance of graduating.
I think it’s time for college administrators to forget about creating artificial diversity and focus on finding the best students.