Retire the Scholastic Aptitude Test : Education: College admissions should be based on more accurate measures such as academic achievement.

Although the granddaddy of college admission criteria still has a pulse, last rites are in order for the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Already, 192 colleges and universities have abandoned the SAT as a required element of their selection process. My own institution joined them last month. It’s time for the rest to embrace this movement.

During my recruiting visits this fall, I was amazed by the degree of frustration secondary school professionals expressed toward the College Board and its SAT. So it was not surprising how many embraced the new SAT-optional policy at Connecticut College with a heartfelt “Amen!”

To them, the SAT is a burden. They spend too much time explaining the test’s implications, regulations and fee structure to bewildered students. When students fare poorly, counselors are hounded by parents seeking untimed testing opportunities for newfound learning disabilities.

This chorus of consternation includes college admissions officials, who question the wisdom of recent SAT reforms that removed much of the “standard” from standardized testing. Test-takers have the “option” of using calculators in the math sections, but colleges will not know which scores were produced with such technological aid. It is especially troubling to think of disadvantaged inner-city and rural high school students who don’t have access to this “optional” edge on a test already accused of cultural bias.

Cries of “foul” also cloud the College Board’s decision to raise the combined verbal and math median score from about 900 to 1,000, which would artificially inflate scores. (The so-called “median” is the College Board’s designation and a misnomer since the top score is 1,600.)

These “enhancements” compound longstanding objections: Allegations of gender and cultural testing bias have haunted the College Board for years. Legions of students earnestly profess that they “don’t test well” and in fact, many of the very best students do not. The rapid expansion of test preparation courses fueled the idea that the exam rewards preparation, not just aptitude. People fear the consequences of a low score and clearly see the benefits of a high one and a cottage industry developed around this twin perception. There is money to be made by both the College Board and the test prep companies, but these expensive courses aggravate the disparity between affluent and disadvantaged or unsavvy test-takers.

What began in the 1940s as an aptitude test for the nation’s elite has evolved into a phenomenon that consumes the college admission process. Curricular issues are secondary. In fact, the SAT does not reinforce the work of teachers or a rigorous curriculum, it circumvents them. Its dominance suggests that quick-fix opportunities like one three-hour exam can compensate for inadequate student performance over the long run.

Without a mandatory SAT, the attention of admissions officials and students returns to more substantial academic considerations like the strength and depth of the high school course of study, the level of academic achievement and rank in class, personal recommendations, the quality of writing samples and even standardized achievement tests, which gauge performance in subject areas and are more directly tied to curriculum.

In admission committees, these factors generate considerable commentary about a candidate’s intellectual curiosity, intensity and vigor. While perhaps more subjective than a “standardized” test, these credentials anchor the admission review process in the classroom, where it belongs. It is much harder to invoke the “I don’t test well” disclaimer for a C in English than for a 480 verbal score. Admission officers come to be less like “deans of denial” fixated on numbers than counselors reviewing academic performance. The burden of proof remains squarely--and justifiably--on each student.

To be sure, some students are well-served by the SAT. An optional admission policy accommodates the talents of strong test-takers and “late bloomers” with modest transcripts but innate ability. But the majority of college applicants--and we who work with them--are equally well-served by an admission process that once again places an academic orientation clearly and unequivocally at its core.