Michael Hoover

If you missed education writer Jay Mathews’s intriguing article “Bad Scores, Good Company” in the “Metro” section of “The Washington Post” on June 23, you should go online and call it up, especially if you harbor a healthy skepticism toward standardized tests.

The article’s subhead declares, “Analysts and Achievers Say SAT Results Don’t Dictate Success,” and the article proceeds to discuss a number of individuals who have achieved considerable prominence in their chosen fields in spite of—are you ready for this?--having scored relatively low on their SAT or ACT in high school. Imagine, people who have actually achieved real success in life in spite of the fact that they bombed their standardized tests when they were 17 or 18! Mathews cites prominent individuals like Paul Wellstone, the late senator from Minnesota (his score was reportedly below 900), who refused to let their scores limit their careers or intellectual pursuits.

The makers of these national tests, which most selective colleges rely on heavily as part of their admissions process, claim that scores on these tests are accurate predictors of success in college. Combined with other criteria such as the rigor of the student’s academic course load, teacher recommendations, extracurricular activities, and personal essays, these scores help college admissions directors make their crucial decisions.

Having been intimately involved in the college application process for a third of a century, I appreciate the pressure these decision-makers are under to have some objective criteria to help them make their selections. A 1450 SAT score trumps a mere 1220 score every time, right? For some colleges yes, others are more open and deliberate. I’m also aware of how often selective colleges tout their incoming classes’ high standardized test scores so that they look good in comparison to other selective colleges.

But as a teacher, I live day in and day out with the high school seniors who are very, very competent students and bright individuals, but whose psyches have been boxed in by their scores. When you are 16 or 17 and show up on a Saturday morning set on doing your best on a test that just about everyone has told you will determine your entire future, it’s quite intimidating. And then, weeks later, you open that envelope with your scores and you find out that, in spite of your best efforts or the quality of your high school grades, you don’t quite measure up. You don’t measure up to the college you had your eye on or you don’t measure up to many of your friends against whom you compare your scores. And then you shut up for the rest of your life about your scores.

But shutting up doesn’t diminish the emotional influence that the “low” (it’s all relative) scores can have on many students. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard a student complain out loud about how he or she is agonizing over their “miserable 1160” score, knowing that there are 10 other kids in the class who would give anything for that score. For years I have been telling my students that if they let a standardized test score define who they are then they really are crazy.

If I were to list here all the students I have taught who had what they thought were low standardized test scores, but who have gone on to college or careers and become outstanding successes, the publisher of this paper would have to grant me just about all the pages in this edition.

Now I don’t want to sound like a hypocrite. As an English Department chairman, I want all the high school students to have mastered as many of the skills as possible that the verbal section of the SAT tests. I’m also not suggesting the tests are worthless. In addition, I want to encourage students to try constantly to better themselves. Just an hour ago I received an e-mail from a junior who was so proud of her 710’s (on both verbal and math) that she could hardly contain herself. I celebrated with her.

But the point that Jay Mathews’s article makes and that I believe to be so crucial is that students need not box their futures in based on some numbers on a test. One of Mathews’s subjects attests to what I’ve been telling my students for years: No one asks you in a job interview what your SAT scores were. Several years ago, a student who I know very well who attended a Fairfax high school and whose verbal-learning skills, due to a serious learning disability, were in the severe range, scored so low on the verbal SAT that she was ashamed. But she took to heart all that her special education teachers told her about how to overcompensate, plan ahead, and work harder. Now, with a BA with high honors from a very respectable college under her belt, she’s in a position with a major company and she evaluates college graduates for their hiring potential. The test designers have yet to develop a test that measures one’s heart.