Scoring for the wrong team

Starting in March, the College Board will allow students to withhold some of their SAT scores under a program known as “Score Choice.” Students who have taken multiple SATs and SAT Subject Tests will have the option of sending results from only selected sittings to Princeton rather than a complete history of all their scores. The College Board claims this program will reduce the high stress levels surrounding the competitive college application process, as students will feel less pressure during individual tests. This single justification fails to consider a variety of detrimental effects that would result from implementing Score Choice, and Princeton should do everything possible to opt out of the program.

Contrary to the College Board’s claim that it would decrease stress, Score Choice will only complicate the SAT process by encouraging students to take the test as many times as possible. When students look around and see their peers taking the test at every opportunity, there will be no reason for them not to do the same. And as students sit for an unreasonable number of tests, it is more likely they will receive an abnormally high score — an outlier, unrepresentative of their “scholastic aptitude.” No longer bound to report all their scores, displaying only this one test will give an inaccurate impression of the student’s performance on the SAT, calling into question the whole value of the test.  

More disconcerting is the fact that Score Choice unfairly advantages wealthier students. Though the price of one SAT, at $45, is not prohibitively expensive, the bill adds up quickly if students test almost once a month. Taking three SAT Subject Tests — each priced at $20 — raises costs further. And though fee deferral is available, it must be obtained through a guidance counselor for each testing and is reserved only for students who qualify for free or reduced school lunch. In many cases, families who do not qualify will find it difficult to afford frequent testing. Given that lower-income students often lack access to expensive tutors and preparation classes, Score Choice will only further expand advantages for wealthy students in the college admission process.

This facet of Score Choice also runs contrary to the Office of Admission’s efforts to broaden its outreach to low-income students, which include the elimination of Early Decision and Dean of Admission Janet Rapelye’s nationwide tour to recruit economically disadvantaged students.

If Princeton is truly committed to minimizing stress in the admission process and increasing its accessibility to lower-income students, the Office of Admission should not accept applicant use of Score Choice. But even joining schools that have explicitly rejected the system — such as Yale, Penn and Stanford — will be moot, as, under the currently announced system, there will be no way to compel students to submit all scores. Princeton should therefore pressure the College Board to eliminate the program or to at least create an opt-out option for schools that oppose Score Choice.

The College Board has miscalculated the benefits and advantages of allowing students to take multiple tests without consequences. But when it comes to Score Choice, Princeton can still make the right choice.