[dandesim]

That’s just straight false, or at least I have never seen any evidence showing a strong correlation. What has been shown is the negative advantage minorities, impoverished, ESL, disabled people have when taking the test and the advantages that wealthy people who can pay for tutors have.

[ghaff]

ANd yet there's widespread reinstitution of standardized test requirements, see e.g. https://admissions.dartmouth.edu/apply/update-testing-policy

[knightoffaith]

>What has been shown is the negative advantage minorities, impoverished, ESL, disabled people have when taking the test and the advantages that wealthy people who can pay for tutors have.

How does this contradict the GP? This doesn't necessarily seem inconsistent with standardized tests correlating better with academic success on its face. Because I would expect that such people tend to have not just worse standardized test scores but also worse academic success (because of the advantages that wealthy people have that these people lack).

[dandesim]

There is a difference between aptitude (intelligence) and academic success (grades). There is also the underlying issue of equity.

If someone with a high aptitude but low academic performance is put into a situation where they have more access to resources, they will perform better than someone with low aptitude that has the means to make up for it in their academic success.

For instance, the popular college prep hack is take the SAT three times. Study for a different section each time, and colleges will take your highest score of each section. That’s not possible without the moderate financial means to take the test multiple times.