Many times I have spoken with parents of all ages regarding future college attendance.  I give these parents all the same general answer: ‘A student from a Sudbury model school does what any high-school graduate does.  They take their SAT’s, do well on their applications, and although they may need to work harder to find a human being to speak with (to explain their lack of grades, transcripts, etc), they actually tend to have a higher acceptance rate into college than public school students.’  We often go on to speak about what colleges look for in students these days, and I often times speak about the fact that colleges and universities LOVE students that come from alternative schools – they are the applicants who know how to think and learn!

I recently read an article by Daniel Greenberg (founder, Sudbury Valley School) that will never have me be so flippant about students taking the SAT’s again. Not because they won’t need them for college admissions (they will), but because I have learned to think more critically about what it is that we are asking teenagers to do by taking these tests.  Here is a summary of points from Greenberg’s article:

• SAT – Scholastic Aptitude Test.  The idea of the SAT is to measure a student’s ‘scholastic aptitude’ – in other words, their ability to learn – with a number.  Essentially, to put a number on what an individual is capable of learning.  That, in and of itself, is a frightening thought.
• There are 2 sections to this test – verbal & mathematic.  Somewhere, sometime, someone decided that measuring verbal & mathematical abilities would tell you the potential of a college applicant.  What happened to all of the other aptitudes, like artistic, interpersonal, and technical, just to name a few?  Why weren’t these subjects chosen?  Something is missing.
• SAT’s are timed.  Real learning, & real creativity, does not take place on a time-line.  This doesn’t mean that there aren’t timelines in the adult world – any job will have them. But time & speed have little to do with effective thinking.
• The content of the SAT’s is also questionable – I mean, does knowing geometry formulas prove that you can think logically?  And does being able to decipher the meaning of a chunck of text – taken out of context of the larger body of work – really have any relevancy in the real world?
• The SAT’s can be crammed for.  If nothing else, this alone negates the supposed intent of these tests.  One cannot ‘cram’ the ability to learn. One can cram content, certainly.  But one’s aptitude to learn cannot be crammed for, and no prep-course will improve it.

The SAT’s are the mainstay of American College Admissions, so this article is in no way intended to say, in any way, “Don’t take the SAT test.”  Quite to the contrary – I can’t wait to tell people about our first graduate, and to brag about the college that to which he or she is accepted.  I do, however, consider it my mission in life to have people think critically and independently about issues related to education.  So don’t take my word for it, or Dan Greenberg’s.  Do the thinking for yourself, and see what conclusions you reach.

Dan Greenberg’s article can be found in “Education in America: A View from Sudbury Valley.”  Copies are available in the school library for check-out.