Atkinson and Geiser (2009) make a strong argument for moving to a new form of college admissions testing using curriculum-based achievement tests. In making their case, however, they exaggerate the weaknesses of current tests such as the ACT and SAT by minimizing these tests’ predictive utility and claiming a stronger relationship to socioeconomic status measures than is justified. Although some of the features that they would like admissions tests to have, such as providing a strong signal to students, are indeed desirable, the tight alignment of admissions tests to college preparatory courses in high school is unlikely to be achieved on a national level without a national curriculum.
AgronowS.StudleyR. (2007, November). Prediction of college GPA from new SAT scores—A first look. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the California Association for Institutional Research, Monterey, CA.
2.
AtkinsonR. (2001). Standardized tests and access to American universities. The 2001 Robert H. Atwell Distinguished Lecture, American Council on Education, Washington, DC.
3.
AtkinsonR. C.GeiserS. (2009). Reflections on a century of college admissions tests. Educational Researcher, 38, 665–676.
4.
GeiserS. (with Studley, R.). (2002). UC and the SAT: Predictive validity and differential impact of the SAT I and SAT II at the University of California. Educational Assessment, 8, 1–26.
5.
LinnR. L. (2003, September1). Performance standards: Utility for different uses of assessments. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(31).
6.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
7.
SackettP. R.KuncelN. R.ArnesonJ. J.CooperS. R.WatersS. D. (2009). Does socioeconomic status explain the relationship between admissions tests and post-secondary academic performance?Psychological Bulletin, 135, 1–22.
8.
ZwickR. (2004). Is the SAT a “wealth test”? The link between educational achievement and socioeconomic status. In ZwickR. (Ed.), Rethinking the SAT: The future of standardized testing in university admissions (pp. 203–216). New York: Routledge Falmer.
