Reader (and Weekly Standard blogger) Stuart Koehl writes in an e-mail:

My daughter applied to seven schools in 2007-2008. … All said essentially the same thing: they go with your best score on each section of the SAT (and, inter alia, none of them counted the writing section of the test, which they found seriously flawed). So, I fail to see how the new SAT policy really changes anything.

True to a degree — though as he writes, many colleges combine “your best score on each section of the SAT,” which will no longer be possible when students choose the new method of disclosing scores. The College Board will send the best total score to schools, meaning that if you got a higher overall score the second time but a lower Writing score, your colleges wouldn’t know about your previous higher Writing score.

But the thing is, not all schools throw out everything but a student’s best work, and further, it’s a stupid practice that the College Board is now encouraging. Someone who took the SAT once and got a 1300 is not equal to someone who took it four times, averaged 1100, and happened to get a 1300 once. I’m not sure how badly this distorts the admissions process, but it would be interesting for a researcher to take a group of multiple-time SAT takers and see whether their high scores, average scores, or first-time scores best predict their college grades. (College Board claims multiple test taking does not work, and does not discriminate against poorer applicants who can’t fork over $45 three or more times, like 15 percent of SAT takers do.)

(Side note: Koehl and I already hashed out the debate over the SAT’s new writing section. I’m very much for it based on the available evidence; he’s not a fan. I’m still all for killing the SAT entirely, by the way.)