<p>
I agree to some extent – but I don’t think that the majority of students invest the time and money that people on CC are willing to spend. My point earlier is similar to that which Garland makes above: high scores are not a fluke. I think there may be false negatives in SAT results (high aptitude kids not demonstrating their abilities via the score) but I don’t believe that there are false positives (lower-ability kids scoring higher than their underlying abilities would allow.) </p>
<p>I view the SAT as a tool. It is ONE indication of aptitude, and as such I don’t think it should be dismissed as completely unrelated to the college selection process. I also believe that most colleges, with the possible exception of stats-driven public universities, look at ALL the pieces of the pie – GPA, essays, SAT I, SAT II, APs or college courses taken, outside activities – and make the best decision they can with the information available. I don’t know of a better way to do it. It’s not a perfect system, but if you remove one variable, such as the SAT I, you clearly increase the impact of the other variables. How can that be more fair than the current system? At least this way, a student from an average school can demonstrate high ability through testing, or the kid from a school without APs can show their strengths through other tests. The more views of a student that are available, the clearer the big picture becomes.</p>