"… Of course, a pandemic is a unique situation. But admissions offices could and should consider that when reviewing a student’s application. A true holistic approach would consider test scores—knowing their limitations—with the full picture of a student.
Instead of making entrance exams optional, colleges should require them but ensure they aren’t the end-all, be-all of the admissions decision. Test scores should be considered as just one part of a student’s application. And states should do their part by providing entrance tests for students during school hours and at no cost. Doing so is a better way to ensure that low-income students get every chance they can to go to college."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/wesleywhistle/2020/06/03/scrapping-the-sat-wont-fix-college-admissions/#64827bd6bc03
The problem is that test scores are an objective measure. Not perfect of course, but they are the only hope for kids who are not favored by admissions committees.
Eliminating the SAT benefits the wealthy, the upper middle class, and especially URM. It hurts smart but poor kids the most.
Along these lines, I have been thinking about how the UC system got rid of the SAT requirement and intends to create their own. A lot of people have heralded this, but it makes me wonder that if eventually, many colleges will do this. It’s unlikely, but imagine a world where students must take like a different exam for almost each school they apply to. I definitely agree with the article’s thoughts that colleges have to start seeing standardized tests in a new light and not using the SAT/ACT as such a huge part of the decision.
It would not be surprising if many colleges wanted to have some standardized test measure to use, but are not particularly satisfied with the SAT and/or ACT, but have to accept (both of) them because they have incumbency and network effect advantage. But then what each college wants to see in a standardized test useful for it may not be the same as what some other college wants to see.