Both Jewett and Geraghty believe tests are most useful when they are either very high or low or show a large discrepancy with high school performance. Jewett says his office tries to take into consideration such factors as how much exposure a person has had to the multiple choice type of testing on the SAT, his cultural and social background, the number of times he has taken the test, and other possible mitigating circumstances. Through the application, evaluations and interview, the admissions office is usually able to learn of these influencing circumstances, he says. "One indispensible part of our process is putting a lot of thought and energy into the highest level, and tests can be a helpful approach to fairness," Geraghty says.
Nonetheless, the question of people being denied opportunities by unfair aspects of tests remains. Some believe that standardized tests are geared toward white middle class society, putting poor people and nonwhites at a distinct disadvantage. The NAACP has consistently attacked test makers on this point. ETS officials claim and Jewett and Geraghty seem to agree to some extent, however, that without tests, many talented people would never have been recognized by admissions offices. "Abolishing tests would only hurt the people we are trying to help," Geraghty says.
Other critics claim that some students going to private schools such as Andover and Exeter are trained many years in advance on how to take the tests. Milton Academy, for example, holds SAT preparation sessions. Many other schools such as the Detroit Country Day School in Michigan have started to coach their students and others in "exam tricks." Coaching centers such as Test Prep Services, the John Sexton Test Preparation Center, and the Stanley Kaplan Educational Center, all with branches in Boston, help people who can pay the fee to improve their scores. Until recently, ETS refused to admit that coaching could improve scores on their tests, but with the recent release of a Federal Trade Commission Report, stating that coaching does indeed help, ETS is starting to reveal exam hints in its booklets. Critics claim that middle class students who can take advantage of test prep centers, or who go to private schools, have a distinct advantage, while poor people have no such help available.
None seem to disagree that a thorough look at the testing industry would be a good idea, and many positive changes would be welcome. Few, however, have many constructive suggestions to make. Many of the faults of testing are glaringly clear, but few who want to eliminate testing suggest some sort of alternative to it. "We must recognize and understand that some of the kind of criticism is aimed at the abuse of the use of tests and rather than at the tests themselves," Jewett says. "I worry that some of the criticisms tend to throw out testing without providing an alternative. Tests do help present a total picture."
Probably the greatest danger of tests is that students tend to take their test scores as an indication of their intelligence or, worse yet, of their worth either as a student or as a human being. "ETS doesn't do enough to tell students that just because they got a poor SAT doesn't mean they are not talented," Solomon says.
"People take tests entirely too seriously. They read much more into it than it was ever intended to show," Geraghty says, adding, "They should not be overly impressed by anything that has numbers." "One should never get seduced into the notion that tests are in any way scientific," she says.
Still, the stigma of a low SAT score can stay with a person all his life. In many ways, SAT scores act as a status symbol, something to show off. But their value is questionable. The debate--call it war--over testing is apparently just heating up and will probably continue for many years. It is unclear what will result from the controversy, but most likely the public will begin to scrutinize tests and their results more closely than ever before.