According to many “progressives,” the answer is yes. The tests that colleges use to determine which applicants are most capable of doing the work required are, in their view, unfair to students from underrepresented groups. Using the tests keeps many of them from admission at our “elite” colleges, which keeps us from achieving true social justice.

That leftist line of thinking is displayed in a new book by Nicholas Lemann, Higher Admissions, and I review it in today’s Martin Center article. 

Lemann provides a concise history of the development of standardized testing, but his discussion of the pros and cons leaves much to be desired. He does not bother himself with the arguments that have been raised in favor of the tests or against the leftist project of “equity” achieved by preferences for certain groups.

The interesting point in the book was when Lemann asked why we couldn’t leave college admissions alone, just letting the market work. Of course not, he answers, because markets are so horribly flawed with favoritism and corruption. I push back against that notion. Markets are in fact very good at rewarding individuals based on their achievements. Favoritism and corruption are bad for market competitors.

Besides, there is nothing particularly great about going to an “elite” school.

Americans would be far better off if we forgot about the group equality obsession.