The SAT Has Gone Digital. How Else Should College Admissions Change?
New Yorker | with Eren Orbey
In this interview, Orby provides an assessment of the upcoming changes to the SAT as it goes digital, including arguments for and against use of the SAT and the real problem behind the “cutthroat win-or-lose, net-zero game” of college admissions.
“I will say that I was impressed when I spoke with leaders at the College Board—they came across as earnest, smart people who are trying to make the best version of this test that they can…”
“As a student, I felt that I benefitted a lot from the SAT,” Orbey explains. “I went to a private school, but I was raised by a single mother, who had immigrated to the United States. I felt that the SAT was a lot more predictable and controllable than many other elements of the admissions game.”
“…The most compelling arguments in favor of the SAT usually involve looking at the worse evils in the college-admissions process—things such as essays, which can be gamed a lot more easily, or extracurriculars, which are generally available to richer students who have more time and resources, as well as parents pushing to get them involved.”
As for the new test, which Orbey took, “It just felt simpler... Taking the test on a laptop, instead of having to worry about bubbling in answers, felt like it removed a lot of the stereotypes about the test…[it] has still retained its predictive capacity, but what’s changing is that students feel it’s easier.”
As for “test optional” schools such as Harvard, “What’s less clear is whether the absence of SAT scores, or the option to submit them or not submit them, actually helps those [diversity] outcomes, or whether it’s a kind of superficial advertisement from these colleges... It’s kind of a mess, and I think the clearest way to reduce stress for students would be to have a consistent rule.” For example, the University of California system is test-blind while MIT requires the test for all applicants.
“At the end of the day, the real problem seems to be the scarcity of opportunity for higher-education success. Across top schools, there’s so much interest and so few spots, and it tends to seem like a cutthroat win-or-lose, net-zero game.”