The brutal truth is that shelling out that kind of money for test prep might actually result in academically better prepared students.
In other words, if the test prep leads to learning the material more thoroughly, it may still be a good predictor of who is going to thrive in an advanced educational environment.
It’s not clear that any system that accurately predicts future student success, cannot be games by parents throwing money at it.
I think the current proposal agrees - "Minimum bar plus lottery" caps the returns on spending money, but also other forms of merit.
I also agree that it's impossible and probably undesirable to keep folks from investing in every kind of preparation they can.
However, I think the test is a uniquely concentrated opportunity to invest in swaying the admissions system rather than in preparing more holistically. What I'd love to see explored are:
- A more holistic admissions packet that includes evaluation beyond GPA.
- Public resources on advanced education earlier in the curriculum.
- Some examination of Chicago-style admissions, which ranks students within local geographies to pick highest achievers from many backgrounds (yes, I'm aware of many arguments from both sides against this structure).
In other words, if the test prep leads to learning the material more thoroughly, it may still be a good predictor of who is going to thrive in an advanced educational environment.
It’s not clear that any system that accurately predicts future student success, cannot be games by parents throwing money at it.