What's up with SAT's

So what’s with this SAT flap? Suddenly some people from academia are calling for the abolition of this sacrosanct shibboleth that for years has determined whether you get into Harvard or Slippery Rock.

The fuss is about the purpose of the SAT and what exactly it indicates. Those in favor of this test state that it is the great equalizer in this era of grade inflation and unequal schools and unequal curriculum. Those against it state that it is WASP-ish and more of an I.Q. test than a validation of what one has learned or a predictor of how well one will do in college.

People who do well in high school tend to do well in college regardless of their SAT score and regardless of where they went to high school. That’s my belief based on my personal experience and common sense. Achievers simply achieve. If the bar is raised they tend to jump higher. I had a college roommate who had 1500 SAT scores. (1600 was perfect, then 1500 is great.) He graduated with a 2.4 G.P.A. from Notre Dame because he was a screw-off just like he was in high school even though he was brighter than all of us. I learned far more in high school and college than he did but the SAT indicates largely not what one has learned but rather the potential for learning. Sure, you have to have a decent vocabulary and know the basics of mathematics but the most important attribute of the test is the ability to analytically reason, which makes for good learners.

The world is full of people who reason brilliantly but do not do well in college or in life because of behavioral deficits. Otherwise, the world would necessarily be run by the brainy types and one only needs to look to the Bush White House and North Korea to see that that’s not true.

Think about this: Do those with the highest I.Q.’s run the Fortune 500? Sure, some are very smart, but the advocates of the SAT I think would have to state that they must have very high SAT scores and that simply is not the case. The SAT is not a predictor of success in college or in life.

I had a 1200 SAT score, not bad, but not Princeton-like who rejected me from admission. I graduated from Notre Dame with a 3.85 G.P.A. I would have graduated from Princeton with the same or better. It had nothing to do with the SAT; it had to do with my work ethic, sense of purpose and the mission of doing well as the paramount goal of my life at the time.

The SAT score said that I could not do the work at Princeton. Bologna. I didn’t have the right analytical genes. Success in anything, college, business, sports, life, is more a matter of attitude and desire than innate ability. Does any sane person dispute this? Otherwise, how do you explain 5’6 Mugsy Bogues who was in the NBA or George W. Bush in the White House? Think about it, but not too analytically.