[JohnR34231]

I'd watch the unintended consequences of throwing out SAT scores.  For all their flaws they provided a measure of objectivity to an applicant pool.

That objectivity often helped show the kid from the wrong school or a school with limited AP classes was just as good as the kid from the prep school with an inflated resume.   In a post SAT world it will be tempting to just select the kid from the right school with the right background of inflated extra-curriculars, travel, and charity work.   Note that all of these favor the well off.

As a kid with two teaching parents who went to a rural school I'm pretty sure it wasn't my GPA that got me in.  On the other hand at Stanford 4 years of FFA may have helped more than I realized at the time ... but nonetheless, I'm glad my SATs were high.

By damning SATs we may have just made successful applicants much less diverse.

This is a commonly held belief that is not supported by much of anything other than marketing statements from corporations like the college board. Numerous books have been written that strike down this belief one of which I can recommend off the top of my head is The Years That Matter Most by Paul Tough, and if I remember correctly The Price of Admission by Daniel Golden.

My impression is you usually see the reverse. People comment that since wealthy parents can afford expensive, extensive, SAT/ACT prep courses for their kids, that standardized tests favor the applicants from the wealthy prep schools.

[JohnR34231]

I'd watch the unintended consequences of throwing out SAT scores.  For all their flaws they provided a measure of objectivity to an applicant pool.

That objectivity often helped show the kid from the wrong school or a school with limited AP classes was just as good as the kid from the prep school with an inflated resume.   In a post SAT world it will be tempting to just select the kid from the right school with the right background of inflated extra-curriculars, travel, and charity work.   Note that all of these favor the well off.

As a kid with two teaching parents who went to a rural school I'm pretty sure it wasn't my GPA that got me in.  On the other hand at Stanford 4 years of FFA may have helped more than I realized at the time ... but nonetheless, I'm glad my SATs were high.

By damning SATs we may have just made successful applicants much less diverse.

This is a commonly held belief that is not supported by much of anything other than marketing statements from corporations like the college board. Numerous books have been written that strike down this belief one of which I can recommend off the top of my head is The Years That Matter Most by Paul Tough, and if I remember correctly The Price of Admission by Daniel Golden.

My impression is you usually see the reverse. People comment that since wealthy parents can afford expensive, extensive, SAT/ACT prep courses for their kids, that standardized tests favor the applicants from the wealthy prep schools.