LETTERS.(Brief Article)

Judged Objectively for Once

To the editor:

I was greatly heartened to read Dr. Dowling's well-argued article (Winter 1999-2000) defending the meaningfulness of the SATV. I am one of those people who got 800 on the GRE and who can claim no special social advantages. In fact, I've become used to having doors slammed in my face (both before and after college) on the basis that, on first (and last) impression, I obviously did not have the "right stuff" or even seemed stupid I suspect part of the problem is my ethnic-looking appearance: I've been variously assumed to be American Indian, Chinese, and Jewish by others who were open about it or whom I've tricked into frankness on the subject by certain surprise questions after detecting prejudice. The SAT was a boon to me in high school, and I will never forget the amazement expressed by the guidance counselor who notified me (and who didn't know me, although he somehow thought he did). It was the first time in my life that I was judged objectively, and without a puzzling note of criticism.

I made a point of going to a prestige college, not really because of the prestige, but because I wanted to be an average student there, my best shot at gaining social acceptance. I'm glad that Dr. Dowling, with the help of Michele Hernandez's statistics, has shown that this is not unusual at all.

I might note that there is at least one good reason that high school GPAs are better correlated with college GPAs that does not weaken the validity of the SAT/ GRE: at least in small schools, they are both based partly on personal contact between evaluator and evaluee. I would like to see how these correlations work out when only courses involving "blind" grading are used. Perhaps, now that Dr. Dowling has raised this issue so eloquently, a statistician or social scientist will explore it further.

Dorothy Pugh

A Qualified Endorsement