The University System of Maryland is changing admissions policies at Salisbury University, making the submission of an SAT score optional for applicants with a GPA of 3.5 or higher. Questions surrounding the fairness and effectiveness of the SAT in predicting college success were primary reasons cited for the implementation of this five-year pilot program. We are in full support of Salisbury’s experiment and appreciate the willingness of the system to take calculated risks.
The SAT has become an increasingly pervasive influence in the lives of high schoolers, and opponents of the test have argued that it discriminates against low-income students who may not be able to afford the Kaplan classes that are ubiquitous for many.
But then again, it is only half-jokingly that we say most things in life discriminate against lower-income individuals. What the system is sure to be watching for is the effect Salisbury’s policy has on the overall scholastic quality of their student body.
We worry, however, that this argument is really ignoring the true dilemma of colleges – the one that discriminates against the poor to a far greater extent. Do you admit the most qualified class, or do you consider legacy and wealth? Poorer students simply do not bring the same glory (read between the lines: money) back to the university as they grow older. On Sept. 9, The Wall Street Journal published an article entitled “How Lowering the Bar Helps Colleges Prosper,” where it is described how universities such as Duke and Brown have pursued an extremely effective policy of recruiting the not necessarily academically fearsome children of the rich and famous.
Can the elimination of the SAT as an admissions requirement raise social justice, student quality and university endowments? Which of these factors are most important? We don’t know, but Salisbury’s experiment will provide some needed insight.
Until then, College Park should hold its horses. Though institutions like Harvard have ended programs such as early action in the name of helping the unfortunate, our university doesn’t have as many chips to risk. Instead, we should be thankful the system and Salisbury have the daring to explore difficult questions. We should all be watching with great interest.
