Email This StoryEditorial: SAT reversal commendable but too little, too late
Oct. 21, 2008
 Claire Taylor/Lariat Staff |
 |
While it's commendable that the university humbly admitted fault, this admittance came only after receiving national negative publicity. The most regrettable part is that this whole ordeal could have been avoided if university officials were more transparent in their dealings and sought the input of faculty and college testing experts before offering cash incentives for the retesting.
The university offered this year's freshmen incentives to the tune of a $1,000 scholarship each year for four years for raising their SAT score by at least 50 points, in addition to a $300 bookstore gift certificate just for taking the test.
The incentives lured a total of 861 students to retake the test after being admitted and enrolled at the university. The incentives for freshmen cost the university roughly $862,000 this year. This number does not include scholarship money to be paid to students in future years in conjunction with the retesting.
The Times published three articles on the retesting, including an editorial. Other news outlets, such as The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Associated Press and insidehighered.com, all ran stories on the retesting.
Each article was loaded with comments from authoritative sources such as David A. Hawkins, director of public policy and research for the National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC); and Robert Schaeffer, the public education director for FairTest, who both damned the university's retesting.
"This appears to be the type of misuse of undergraduate admission tests that the NACAC Testing Commission sought to identify and correct," Hawkins said.
Schaeffer called the retesting "a straightforward, cynical attempt to manipulate test score averages to boost Baylor's rankings."
The Faculty Senate here at Baylor also passed a motion disapproving of the retesting, stating, "This practice is academically dishonest and should be discontinued."
In addition to all the buzz, there's some speculation that Baylor violated the ethics code of the NACAC, which states that universities shouldn't use standardized test scores as a single criterion for awarding financial aid.
In short, the SAT retesting has cast a shadow of doubt on the ethics of the higher-ups at our university. It has caused some to ponder whether Baylor did this for selfish reasons, such as boosting its national standing in rankings such as U.S. News and World Report, in which Baylor slipped from No. 75 to 76 this year.
Baylor should have foreseen a potential problem with enacting such a program. Now our officials have to do damage control on a mess they could have easily avoided.
Even though officials are now making the right choice by admitting fault, their apology is too little, too late. Though we applaud their vow to abandon the SAT program, our reputation in the eyes of several college admissions professionals, alumni, current students, families of prospective students and, possibly our peer universities has been tarnished.
If, in the spirit of transparency, there had been some discussion about the prospect of holding a retesting and offering cash incentives, university officials would have seen the potential backlash to the SAT program and not offered it.
With any luck, the damage done is not irreversible, and we can reaffirm our university as fair and ethical.
More News ...
