Thread by @JonBoeckenstedt

Thread: Be watching for articles and opinion pieces with the new narrative that "The SAT helps poor students." They're starting to pop up like flowers in the spring.

Why? Here's my take on it:

First, spend three minutes on this video. It's about what College Board did when the UC system tried to eliminate tests the first time, in the early part of this century. It is well worth your time. It's from @thetestdoc

thetestdoc.org/press#uc-excer…

The College Board is a business. It's now lost the UC and Cal State systems for real, and it's holding on by its fingernails. It has to find some way to maintain market share and pay the rent on its New York City office.

They're calling in chips from their true believers.

I'm not going to amplify the bad articles. One from The Atlantic was sent my way. Last week there was one in the WSJ. I'm sure there are others.

Who reads these articles, would you suspect?

Without doing a deep dive (you can pretend you're interested in advertising in these publications and they'll send you all the data), I'm guessing it tends strongly white, strongly high income, and strongly college educated.

In other words, people who have probably benefited from standardized tests, and want to hold onto that advantage for their children or grandchildren.

The "Diamond in the Rough" theory is heartwarming for people who don't think deeply about this. Why? There are always examples where it's true. You can always trot out some students from under-resourced high schools who nailed the test and went to an Ivy.

But that's like asking your friend how much they won in Vegas. You don't expect them to just count the bets they won; you have to consider how much and how many they lost.

Just like we have to do with the SAT. Measure benefits and costs. It's not worth it.

Again, if the Ivy + 2 all go back to tests, it affects me not one bit. They can do what they want. You might feel the same.

But don't let College Board convince you that the purpose of the tests is altruistic.

Ask anyone (including me) who worked on a College Board committee, or better yet, ask any former employee. They'll tell you how a "membership organization" is really run. And why they exist.

It's a business. Period.

The Communications team at CB is to be credited with convincing people that their product is good for society. They've done top notch work persuading regular people to advocate for a product that rewards the opportunity granted by birth.

Just do your own thinking. And before you spit out the UC Faculty Senate study (that mentions College Board research over 50 times) just read this response to it. cshe.berkeley.edu/publications/s…

That study made claims not even the College Board or ACT make about their own products, just in case you wanted to know how unbelievable it is.

And before you cite any faculty research or even op-eds on the SAT, check the authors to see who sponsors their research or their conferences. You might be surprised. But then again, watch the video further up this thread again.

Think for yourself. It's the least you can do.

Oh, and #EMTalk