Youth talk

As a student applying to universities in the UK and US, there are a certain number of standardised tests that need to be taken to prove your merit to your desired universities. SAT I and II, TOEFL, TSA … the list goes on.
 
Due to the diversity in curricula, along with students from all over the world applying: university admission officers need some sort of common ground upon which to compare all applicants. Fair enough.

The problem arises when the tests become arbitrary. The question we must ask ourselves is, can we ever fairly compare students who haven’t studied exactly the same curriculum? While the creators of standardised tests believe they have cracked the code, the fact of the matter is that most of these tests boil down to one essential factor: technique.

Open any book on the SAT, and they’ll vehemently claim to increase your points, or return your money. Upon further examination, you’ll discover that it’s all about what tricks you use, and comparatively less to do with your knowledge.

In light of this understanding, shouldn’t these tests aim to assess our competence in our subjects rather than testing how well you can apply ‘process of elimination’?

As much as I’d love to offer a revolutionary idea, I don’t have a clue. But I do hope for a world where students do not have to suffer through the tedium of memorising techniques for a test that is supposed to establish their skill set to universities.