Economic bias of SAT I can be easily overcome

Singhasri is a fifth-year American literature and culture
student.

By Lalita Singhasri

I am emphatically opposed to Sophia Smith’s argument
against the SAT (“Exam has no bearing on academics, just
economics,” Daily Bruin, Nov. 8), as well as Bryant
Tan’s submission against the test (“System based on
testing is inherently rife with prejudice,” Daily Bruin, Nov.
8).

First of all, Smith’s claim that “SAT I scores are
sold to the highest bidder” and that using the SAT I in the
admissions process is the social equivalent of posting
“”˜rich only’ and “˜poor need not
apply’ posters on the doors of Murphy Hall,” indicates
that she is not looking at the whole picture.

Although companies such as the Princeton Review and Kaplan offer
programs that may help students increase their scores, there are
also inexpensive alternatives such as buying study guides in a
bookstore or even borrowing them for free at the public library.
And yes, these are available to the general public, including the
group Tan calls “underrepresented communities.”

I do agree with Tan that “many times applicants from these
communities don’t even know they need to take (the SAT I and
II).” However, this is a problem with our schools and our
communities, not with the test itself. Students must know what they
need to do in order to get into college, and we, the educated, need
to inform them. However, to cite ignorance of the test as a reason
to throw it out is unfounded.

Although prep courses and study materials teach students tricks
for scoring better on the test, the act of preparation actually
comes from the learning and review of useful knowledge. In fact,
contrary to Smith’s argument that the SAT I “tests your
ability to memorize useless words, useless concepts and useless
tricks,” the vocabulary, basic algebra and geometry skills
that the test assesses are very useful in college. It is true that
the larger your mental lexicon is, the more powerful you will be in
the academic world.

For example, two SAT I words, hypocritical and dogmatic, apply
to Smith’s and Tan’s articles. Smith is being
hypocritical when she states, “I know my parents bought me
SAT I prep materials and tutoring, and it sure helped me improve my
score.” Tan is being dogmatic when he states that “the
SAT is culturally biased” and “its content is
irrelevant to intellect and therefore fails as a measure of success
in higher education.”

I am currently tutoring the SAT I to Thai children in my
community at Wat Thai of Los Angeles for free. Sure, I see how some
might consider the reading comprehension passages to be biased in
the interests of the dominant American culture, but everyone
““ even people of color ““ must learn to think in
different ways.

Therefore, I don’t see how a test that challenges people
to open a book to learn vocabulary and math is one that promotes
“an entire system of institutions that privileges
heterosexual white men,” according to Tan. The answer is to
rise up to the challenge, not to lower the bar.