Over the last several decades, it has become painfully apparent that high school students’ performance on the SAT and other standardized tests measures little more than their test-taking skills. Even for schools with large applicant pools, there is little reason not to eliminate the SAT as a requirement for admission—factors such as grade point average, rigor of schedule, and recommendations have been shown to be far better predictors of college success.

Beyond the dubious utility of the SAT and other tests in assessing the fitness of an applicant for admission, several studies have shown that SAT scores, even after the test’s recent revision, unfairly discriminate against specific groups. For example, a 1995 study of the SAT showed that whites scored consistently higher than black and Hispanic students, and that the scores of all groups rise with family income. In 2007, the New York Times reported that the latest round of SAT scores continued to show a significant disparity between the scores of white, affluent students and their minority and low-income peers. In light of this data, we suspect that, despite the College Board’s assertions to the contrary, success on the SAT is likely correlated with factors other than general intelligence or academic ability and academic potential.

That said, problems with the SAT are not limited to score gaps based on race and socioeconomic status. As Richard C. Atkinson, former president of the University of California school system, said to the American Council on Education in 2001, the SAT also tends to “[distort] educational priorities and practices…is perceived by many as unfair, and…can have a devastating impact on the self-esteem and aspirations of young students.” While some argue that the SAT is an important tool for large state schools to comb through their many applicants, publicly expressed skepticism by the University of California itself proves that there is not reason enough to justify these tests.

Given the serious flaws of the SAT and other standardized tests that purport to measure general reasoning abilities, including a limited ability to predict success in college compared to other measures, there is no justification for continuing to require it for college admissions. Bates College made the SAT optional in 1984, and other schools, such as Sarah Lawrence College, have followed suit. Harvard and other institutions of higher education nationwide should do the same.

Robert G. King ’09, a Crimson editorial editor, is a history concentrator in Winthrop House.