Here’s another article disputing the claim in the New Yorker that our educational system represents a meritocracy. So much depends on how one defines merit. Take your SAT scorches. One finds in this interview article:
Selectivity is virtually defined by institutional average SAT scores, and so the SAT remains the most powerful mechanism by which elite institutions create a pool of “credible” candidates. Examine the College Board’s annual data on the relationship between SAT performance and the class status of students’ parents, measured by family income and parent education levels. The data are astounding, showing that high school seniors with highly educated and affluent parents can expect to score hundreds of points higher than students from far more modest social and economic backgrounds. For example, the average SAT score of students whose families earn between $30,000 and $40,000 a year is 1436. That’s compared to the average of 1656 for students whose parents earn $100,000 or more — a 220-point difference.
This is the statement of a guy named Peter Sacks who recently published a book: Tearing Down the Gates: Confronting the Class Divide in American Education. He disputes the claim that the educational system, at least at this point in our sordid history, acts as a social economic equalizer. By the way, Sacks praises the UC system for having moved away from a dependence on SATS.
