I totally agree. I was an SAT high tester in an unsupportive home. I was not a good student. I had actually flunked a grade in elementary school though they let me pass. BTW, I ended up as a principal level at Microsoft.
When I tested 99.9 percentile in Verbal and 97 percentile in Math my father's only comment was, "Who ever thought you could test like that?" Snicker, snicker.
I'm disgusted by this decision. You HAVE to let kids have a way of knowing they have capabilities when for some reason the environment blocks that.
Your anecdote is that you weren’t a good student, but you tested well and you credit that as having unlocked success in your career.
I have 2 anecdotes of high school students who earned near perfect SAT scores, were terrible students in high school, barely passed their undergraduate courses and are struggling to maintain careers in tech.
My point is that standardized testing is a measure of potential. But a college must gamble on a bad-grades, high-scores student. The payoff for a college might be better if they target higher grades with slightly lower scores. Not every student lives up to their capacity and the transition away from home to college isn’t an easy one.
My preference is to build more colleges and let them choose their own entrance criteria. Also, adults should do far more to help high school students understand how much social status, marketing, and press relations do to make some colleges appear far more prestigious than they are.
When I tested 99.9 percentile in Verbal and 97 percentile in Math my father's only comment was, "Who ever thought you could test like that?" Snicker, snicker.
I'm disgusted by this decision. You HAVE to let kids have a way of knowing they have capabilities when for some reason the environment blocks that.