UC regents, faculty debate SAT as admission tool

By Terri Hardy -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 5:30 a.m. PST Wednesday, March 13, 2002

SAN FRANCISCO -- Eliminating the SAT as an admission tool for University of California campuses and replacing it with a new test will be costly, time-consuming and perhaps impractical -- not to mention a major upheaval.

Some UC regents and faculty members wonder if it's worth it.

"We are about to embark on a disruptive, costly process, and we're not certain what the outcome is going to be," UC Regent George Marcus told the other regents. "There has to be a better, easier way."

But UC faculty representatives, as well as UC President Richard Atkinson, aren't so sure. They said revamping the admissions system by creating a new admissions test focusing on achievement over aptitude will be worth the effort and allow the university to better predict which students will be successful.

Most important, they said, is the message the controversial step will send.

"We're telling high school students that taking (college preparatory) courses is important," Atkinson said, "(that) if they master those courses, they will do well on UC's entrance exam."

Currently, the majority of students take the SAT I, an aptitude test of verbal and math reasoning. "That exam has no relationship to what they study in high school," Atkinson said.

He and a faculty group are proposing a curriculum-based exam in place by the fall of 2006 that would include reading, writing and mathematics. In addition, students would take two single-subject exams of their choice -- similar to the SAT II tests now taken by UC applicants.

The result could be improved academic preparation of students, said Eva Baker, a testing expert from the UCLA Graduate School of Education & Informational Studies.

While many regents seemed willing to continue the discussion of the test change at subsequent meetings -- with no decision until July at the earliest -- serious concerns were raised.

Foremost was practicality. Regents and some testing experts at the meeting wondered if a new test would be accepted by out-of-state colleges or the California State University system. Some said a test that is based on what students learn would be criticized because instruction at some high schools is more rigorous than at others.

Matthew Malkan, associate professor of physics and astronomy at UCLA, blasted the proposal, saying that eliminating the SAT I would erode UC academic standards and is not feasible.

"A satisfactory replacement will not be possible in 2006 -- if ever," Malkan said.

Major testing companies that produce the ACT and the SAT admission exams say they can compile workable tests. Atkinson made waves in the academic world when he proposed in February 2001 to do away with the SAT I -- a test relied upon by admissions offices in 90 percent of four-year colleges. He criticized the test as a poor indicator of a student's success and biased against poor students who can't afford test preparation.

Early this year, a UC faculty group that looks at educational policy -- the Board of Admissions and Relations With Schools -- endorsed Atkinson's plan. It based its decision in part on a statistical study that the SAT I is no better a predictor of student success than the single-subject SAT II tests.

BOARS chairwoman Dorothy Perry told the regents that UC reliance on the SAT I was not based on any well-thought-out principles, but was a simple way to sort out large numbers of applicants.

Marcus and other regents suggested that UC hone its use of SAT II tests instead of overhauling the admissions exam.

Atkinson flatly rejected the suggestion.

"It's just not enough," he said.