SAT & Diversity
Minority students (excluding
Asian Americans) test significantly lower on the SAT than do whites, on
average. Heavy reliance on SAT in the admissions process limits severely
minority recruitment, as there is great competition for minority students with
reasonably high SAT scores.
Minority-majority status is
not far off among the traditional student age population.
Maryland Primary & Secondary
Public School Students by Race (fall 2000):
White 53.4%
African
American 37.1%
Asian American
4.4%
Hispanic 4.8%
Native
American .4%
The SAT is
a fairly weak predictor of academic success for minority students and females,
according to William Sedlacek, professor of education at (University of
Maryland) College Park who specializes in research on the SAT. His overview
merits quoting:
“My summary of the literature on the SAT is that it shows reasonable validity in predicting first year grades for white middle and upper class males. However, it does not predict as well for women or people of color. The SAT does not correlate well with grades beyond the first year for anyone, and tends to have a zero correlation with the grades of seniors. The SAT does not have validity in predicting the retention rate in any year for any group.”
1.
Texas “Top 10%” law
Following a
1996 federal court decision disallowing affirmative action in admissions in
Texas universities, the state legislature quickly adopted a law mandating that
the top 10% of high school graduates from all Texas public high schools were
automatically eligible for admission to any public university in Texas,
provided they had taken certain basic college prep.
Results:
While
minority admissions plummeted for the first 2 years, it has since returned to
roughly the same levels as pre-1996 for African American and Hispanics (though
still under-represented), in part due to more aggressive recruitment and
financial aid and support for students from high schools that were sending very
few students to the University of Texas. Admission of Asian American students
has increased more than any group.
SAT-related
data:
The “top
10%” students are dramatically outperforming the “non-top 10%” students,
earning 1st year GPA’s that are not only higher than “non-top 10%”
students with the same SAT scores, but also are higher than “non-top 10%”
students with SAT scores 200-300 points higher! For example, in 1998, top
10% students with SAT scores in the 1000-1090 range earned an average GPA of
2.91 vs. an average GPA of 2.86 for non-top 10% students with SAT’s in the 1300-1390
range. This holds for all ethnic and racial groups, and some minority group
(and not just Asian Americans) SAT ranges outperforming whites in the same
ranges. UT data indicate that the SAT’s have a particularly weak correlation
with first year grades for African Americans and Asian Americans, compared to
rank in high school. Also, retention and graduation rates are also much
better for top-10% students (e.g., 70% graduate in 5 years vs. 54%,
respectively).
Note: All UT students still take the SAT, and about ˝ of all UT admissions are top 10% plan students and ˝ are admitted under more traditional criteria, including SAT.
2.
California
In 2001, UC
President Richard Atkinson called for the discontinuation of the use of the
SATI by UC and replacing it with more subject-matter-oriented tests, such
as the SAT II or others. This has caused a debate nationally and put the SAT
proprietors on the defensive.
Also, in
2000 the UC system adopted a top 4% initiative modeled on the Texas
case.
Since affirmative action was outlawed in 1996, minority student enrollment in the UC system (apart from Asian Americans, who now outnumber whites on several campuses) has plummeted. California became a minority-majority state in 2000.
3.
Florida:
Abolished
affirmative action in admissions in 1999, and introduced the “talented 20%”
law modeled on the Texas law. Many feared minority student enrollment would
drop sharply, but as of summer 2002, minority student enrollment statewide
is as high as ever: 13-14% Hispanic and 19-20% African American. It is not clear how much inter-campus
segregation remains, however. Also, Gainesville only has to accept top 10%.
In general, over the
past several years there has been much discussion nationally about the
over-reliance on the SAT in admissions. The most common change is to
ed-emphasize the role of SAT’s in the admissions process, but not to eliminate
them. Within USM, College Park’s president C.D. Mote advocates this, and
further notes that the SAT has come to be relied upon for purposes it is not
suited, such as measures of campus performance, quality, and rankings. Some 300
schools nationally now de-emphasize or have dropped SAT and ACT in the
admissions process.
Sources:
“Implementation and Results of the Texas Automatic Admissions Law (HB 588) at University of Texas at Austin. Report Number 4.” Fall 2001. UT Austin Admissions Office.
“A Review of the use of standardized test scores in the undergraduate
Admissions Process at the University of Texas at Austin” 1/25/02. Task Force on
Standardized College Admissions Testing, UT Austin.
Fred Hiatt. 2002 (Oct 28) “Texas’s 10 Percent Experiment” Washington
Post.
Maryland Faculty Voice, Sept and Oct. 2001 issues. Articles by William
Sedlacek and C.D. Mote.
‘Florida’s talented 20 Program.” NPR Morning Edition. 7/23/02
Rodolfo Alvarez, UCLA Vice Provost. Presentation on UC admission
policies, August 2000 annual meetings of the American Sociological Association.
Maryland State Dept. of Education “MSDE Schools: Maryland Schools by
County.”