Emphasis on Standardized Tests Undermines Creatively
America's emphasis on standardized testing rewards those
who are good at "quick strategic guessing with less than perfect
information" rather than those who are likely to be successful or
be leaders in their communities, civil rights advocate Lani Guinier said
Friday (October 26, 2001) at the WEAC Convention's Education Issues Breakfast.
"This
process undermines creativity and also undermines problem-solving abilities,"
Guinier said.
"We have an almost religious faith in testing," and yet we're
not sure what those tests predict, said Guinier, the first black tenured
professor at Harvard Law School.
Our society must reassess its system for identifying qualifications,
she said. There is an assumption that students who do well on SATs will
succeed. In some communities, children are being prepared for the SAT
tests as early as the 6th grade. And yet, studies show SAT scores are
not a strong indicator of success in college or later in life.
A study of University of Michigan Law School students over two decades
found no relationship between the students' LSAT scores and their income
as attorneys and found that those with the highest LSAT scores were least
likely to enjoy their careers as lawyers, she said.
That is likely because those who do well on LSATs are the types of people
who tend to believe there is always a right answer and that it can readily
be found.
"That's not the real world, at least not the world I have experienced,"
she said.
In addition, law students who score the highest on the LSAT were least
likely to become leaders in their communities, while those admitted under
affirmative action were most likely to become leaders in their communities.
That is because, Guinier said, they were admitted based on their demonstrated
leadership skills.
Nationwide, she said, the LSAT is only 9% better than random in predicting
law school grades, and yet law schools rely heavily on it in determining
whom to admit, just like undergraduate schools rely on SAT scores.
"We haven't interrogated why we value test smarts when they don't
actually predict job smarts or, more importantly to me, leadership smarts,"
she said.
If the argument for using the SAT is that it is efficient, she said,
we should just go to a lottery system for admitting students to our colleges.
That would be even more efficient, she said, and it would provide greater
access to a broader cross-section of society.
We as a society must re-examine how we determine qualifications and in
the process emphasize what it means to be qualified to perform complex
tasks in a multi-racial democracy, she said.
"This is about linking the value and function of education to the
value and function of our democracy," she said.
In other comments:
- Guinier compared the experiences of our society's disadvantaged -
people of color, women, the poor, the disabled, and gays and lesbians
- to the miners' canary, which is sent into the mine to test the air
quality. If the canary exhibits signs of distress, it's not because
there is something wrong with the canary, it's because there's something
wrong with the air, she said. "The canary is a signal of much deeper
problems," she said. "We need to heed the signal of the canary
so we can better fix the 'atmosphere of the mines' for the benefit of
everyone."
- In response to a question about the concerns over the re-segregation
of Milwaukee schools under the "neighborhood schools" concept,
Guinier said we have never really had desegregation so we can't have
re-segregation."We just have segregation," she said
- In the current debate over protecting civil rights while fighting
terrorism, Guinier said she, like everyone else, wants to feel safe.
"My concern is if we are willing to give up our freedoms to protect
our freedoms, I have to question what it means to live in a free society."
More Convention coverage
Convention agenda
Posted October 26, 2001