Editing SAT (section)

===Predictive validity and powers===
In 2009, education researchers Richard C. Atkinson and Saul Geiser from the [[University of California]] (UC) system argued that high school GPA is better than the SAT at predicting college grades regardless of high school type or quality.<ref>{{cite journal| last1=Atkinson| first1=R. C.| last2=Geiser| first2=S.| date=2009| title=Reflections on a Century of College Admissions Tests| url=http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/49z7127p| journal=Educational Researcher| volume=38| issue=9| pages=665–76| doi=10.3102/0013189x09351981| s2cid=15661086| access-date=September 10, 2018| archive-date=June 23, 2020| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200623113300/https://escholarship.org/uc/item/49z7127p| url-status=live}}</ref> In its 2020 report, the UC academic senate found that the SAT was better than high school GPA at predicting first year GPA, and just as good as high school GPA at predicting undergraduate GPA, first year retention, and graduation.  This predictive validity was found to hold across demographic groups, with the report noting that standardized test scores were actually "better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority students (URMs), who are first-generation, or whose families are low-income."<ref name="Bhavnani-2020">{{cite web| date=Jan 2020| title=Report of the UC Academic Council Standardized Testing Task Force (STTF)| url=https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/sttf-report.pdf| quote=At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, UGPA, and graduation.³ For students within any given (HSGPA) band, higher standardized test scores correlate with a higher freshman UGPA, a higher graduation UGPA, and higher likelihood of graduating within either four years (for transfers) or seven years (for freshmen). Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007, while variance explained by high school grades has decreased, although altogether does not exceed 26%. Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines, even after controlling for HSGPA. In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority students (URMs), who are first-generation, or whose families are low-income.| access-date=August 27, 2020| archive-date=September 14, 2020| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200914013351/https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/sttf-report.pdf| url-status=live}}</ref> A series of College Board reports point to similar predictive validity across demographic groups.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kobrin|first1=Jennifer L.|last2=Patterson|first2=Brian F.|last3=Shaw|first3=Emily J.|last4=Mattern|first4=Krista D.|last5=Barbuti|first5=Sandra M.|date=2008|title=Validity of the SAT® for Predicting First-Year College Grade Point Average. Research Report No. 2008-5|url=https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED563202|access-date=|publisher=College Board|language=en|archive-date=August 21, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230821181113/https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED563202|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Burton|first1=Nancy W.|last2=Ramist|first2=Leonard|date=2001|title=Predicting Success in College: SAT® Studies of Classes Graduating since 1980. Research Report No. 2001-2|url=https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562836|access-date=|publisher=College Entrance Examination Board|language=en|archive-date=April 6, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210406154715/https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562836|url-status=live}}</ref>

But a month after the UC academic senate report, Saul Geiser disputed the UC academic senate's findings, saying "that the Senate claims are 'spurious', based on a fundamental error of omitting student demographics in the prediction model". Indicating when high school GPA is combined with demographics in the prediction, the SAT is less reliable. [[Li Cai (psychometrician)|Li Cai]], a [[UCLA]] professor who directs the [[National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing]], indicated that the UC Academic Senate did include student demographics by using a different and simpler model for the public to understand and that the discriminatory impacts of the SAT are compensated during the admissions process. [[Jesse Rothstein]], a [[UC Berkeley]] professor of public policy and economics, countered Li's claim, mentioning that the UC academic senate "got a lot of things wrong about the SAT", overstates the value of the SAT, and "no basis for its conclusion that UC admissions 'compensate' for test score gaps between groups."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Watanabe |first=Teresa |date=March 19, 2020 |title=Report bolsters idea of dropping SAT, ACT tests for UC admission |url=https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-03-19/uc-admissions-sat-act-new-paper-bolsters-idea-of-dropping-tests |access-date=August 29, 2023 |newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]] |archive-date=August 29, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230829205355/https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-03-19/uc-admissions-sat-act-new-paper-bolsters-idea-of-dropping-tests |url-status=live }}</ref> However, by analyzing their own institutional data, [[Brown University|Brown]], [[Yale University|Yale]], and [[Dartmouth College|Dartmouth]] universities reached the conclusion that SAT scores are more reliable predictors of collegiate success than GPA. Furthermore, the scores allow them to identify ''more'' potentially qualified students from disadvantaged backgrounds than they otherwise would.<ref name=":4" /> At the [[University of Texas at Austin]], students who declined to submit SAT scores when such scores were optional performed more poorly than their peers who did.<ref name=":4" /> These results were replicated by a study conducted by the non-profit organization Opportunity Insights analyzing data from Ivy League institutions (Brown University, [[Columbia University]], [[Cornell University]], Dartmouth College, [[Harvard University]], [[Princeton University]], the [[University of Pennsylvania]], and Yale University) plus [[Stanford University]], the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]], and the [[University of Chicago]].<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Friedman |first1=John |last2=Sacerdote |first2=Bruce |last3=Tine |first3=Michele |date=January 2024 |title=Standardized Test Scores and Academic Performance at Ivy-Plus Colleges |url=https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf |access-date=June 7, 2024 |website=Opportunity Insights |archive-date=June 8, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240608210050/https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=":4" /> A 2009 study found that SAT or ACT scores along with high-school GPAs are strong predictors of cumulative university GPAs. In particular, those with standardized test scores in the 50th percentile or better had a two-thirds chance of having a cumulative university GPA in the top half.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Schmitt |first1=Neal |last2=Keeney |first2=Jessica |last3=Oswald |first3=Frederick L. |last4=Pleskac |first4=Timothy J. |last5=Billington |first5=Abigail Q. |last6=Sinha |first6=Ruchi |last7=Zorzie |first7=Mark |date=November 2009 |title=Prediction of 4-year college student performance using cognitive and noncognitive predictors and the impact on demographic status of admitted students |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19916657/ |url-status=live |journal=Journal of Applied Psychology |volume=96 |issue=4 |pages=1479–97 |doi=10.1037/a0016810 |pmid=19916657 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210831154505/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19916657/ |archive-date=August 31, 2021 |access-date=August 31, 2021}}</ref><ref name="Hambrick-2014" /> A 2010 meta-analysis by researchers from the [[University of Minnesota]] offered evidence that standardized admissions tests such as the SAT predicted not only freshman GPA but also overall collegiate GPA.<ref name="Kuncel-2010" /><ref name="Hambrick-2011" /> A 2012 study from the same university using a multi-institutional data set revealed that even after controlling for socioeconomic status and high-school GPA, SAT scores were still as capable of predicting freshman GPA among university or college students.<ref name="Sackett-2012">{{Cite journal |last1=Sackett |first1=Paul R. |last2=Kuncel |first2=Nathan R. |last3=Beatty |first3=Adam S. |last4=Rigdon |first4=Jana L. |last5=Shen |first5=Winny |last6=Kiger |first6=Thomas B. |date=August 2, 2012 |title=The Role of Socioeconomic Status in SAT-Grade Relationships and in College Admissions Decisions |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797612438732 |url-status=live |journal=Psychological Science |publisher=Association for Psychological Science |volume=23 |issue=9 |pages=1000–1007 |doi=10.1177/0956797612438732 |pmid=22858524 |s2cid=22703783 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210309214619/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797612438732 |archive-date=March 9, 2021 |access-date=February 2, 2021 |via=}}</ref> A 2019 study with a sample size of around a quarter of a million students suggests that together, SAT scores and high-school GPA offer an excellent predictor of freshman collegiate GPA and second-year retention.<ref name="Frey-2019" /> In 2018, psychologists Oren R. Shewach, Kyle D. McNeal, Nathan R. Kuncel, and Paul R. Sackett showed that both high-school GPA and SAT scores predict enrollment in advanced collegiate courses, even after controlling for [[Advanced Placement]] credits.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Shewach |first1=Oren R. |last2=McNeal |first2=Kyle D. |last3=Kuncel |first3=Nathan R. |last4=Sackett |first4=Paul R. |date=2019 |title=Bunny Hill or Black Diamond: Differences in Advanced Course-Taking in College as a Function of Cognitive Ability and High School GPA |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/emip.12212 |journal=Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice |publisher=National Council on Measurement in Education |volume=38 |issue=1 |pages=25–35 |doi=10.1111/emip.12212 |s2cid=96513319 |via=}}</ref><ref name="Frey-2019" />

Education economist Jesse M. Rothstein indicated in 2005 that high-school average SAT scores were better at predicting freshman university GPAs compared to individual SAT scores. In other words, a student's SAT scores were not as informative with regards to future academic success as his or her high school's average. In contrast, individual high-school GPAs were a better predictor of collegiate success than average high-school GPAs.<ref name="Zwick-2007" /><ref name="Rothstein-2005">{{Cite journal |last=Rothstein |first=Jesse |date=2005 |title=SAT Scores, High Schools, and Collegiate Performance Predictions |url=http://eml.berkeley.edu/%7Ejrothst/restingpapers/satpaper2_june2009.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210515174519/https://eml.berkeley.edu/~jrothst/restingpapers/satpaper2_june2009.pdf |archive-date=May 15, 2021 |access-date=February 18, 2021}}</ref> Furthermore, an admissions officer who failed to take average SAT scores into account would risk overestimating the future performance of a student from a low-scoring school and underestimating that of a student from a high-scoring school.<ref name="Rothstein-2005" />

While the SAT is correlated with intelligence and as such estimates individual differences, it does not have anything to say about "effective cognitive performance" or what intelligent people do.<ref name="Frey-2019" /> Nor does it measure non-cognitive traits associated with academic success such as positive attitudes or [[conscientiousness]].<ref name="Frey-2019" /><ref name="Kuncel-2010">{{Cite journal|last1=Kuncel|first1=Nathan R.|last2=Hezlett|first2=Sarah A.|date=December 14, 2010|title=Fact and Fiction in Cognitive Ability Testing for Admissions and Hiring Decisions|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0963721410389459|journal=Current Directions in Psychological Science|publisher=Association for Psychological Science|volume=19|issue=6|pages=339–345|doi=10.1177/0963721410389459|s2cid=33313110|access-date=March 2, 2021|archive-date=March 16, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210316130329/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0963721410389459|url-status=live}}</ref> Psychometricians Thomas R. Coyle and David R. Pillow showed in 2008 that the SAT predicts college GPA even after removing the general factor of intelligence (''g''), with which it is highly correlated.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Coyle|first1=Thomas R.|last2=Pillow|first2=David R.|date=2008|title=SAT and ACT predict college GPA after removing g|url=|journal=Intelligence|volume=26|issue=6|pages=719–729|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2008.05.001}}</ref>

Like other standardized tests such as the ACT or the GRE, the SAT is a traditional method for assessing the academic aptitude of students who have had vastly different educational experiences and as such is focused on the common materials that the students could reasonably be expected to have encountered throughout the course of study. As such the mathematics section contains no materials above the [[precalculus]] level, for instance. Psychologist [[Raymond Cattell]] referred to this as testing for "historical" rather than "current" [[Fluid and crystallized intelligence|crystallized intelligence]].<ref>{{Cite book|last=Ackerman|first=Philip L.|url=http://www.cambridge.org/9781316629642|title=The Nature of Human Intelligence|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-1-107-17657-7|editor-last=Sternberg|editor-first=Robert|location=|pages=|chapter=Chapter 1: Intelligence as Potentiality and Actuality|access-date=January 30, 2021|archive-date=August 21, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230821181135/https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/psychology/cognition/nature-human-intelligence?format=PB&isbn=9781316629642|url-status=live}}</ref> Psychologist [[Scott Barry Kaufman]] further noted that the SAT can only measure a snapshot of a person's performance at a particular moment in time.<ref name="Kaufman-2018">{{Cite web|last=Kaufman|first=Scott Barry|date=September 4, 2018|title=IQ and Society|url=https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/iq-and-society/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200930090158/https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/iq-and-society/|archive-date=September 30, 2020|access-date=March 1, 2021|website=Scientific American}}</ref> Educational psychologists Jonathan Wai, David Lubinski, and Camilla Benbow observed that one way to increase the predictive validity of the SAT is by assessing the student's [[Spatial ability|spatial reasoning ability]], as the SAT at present does not contain any questions to that effect. Spatial reasoning skills are important for success in STEM.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Wai|first1=Jonathan|last2=Lubinski|first2=David|last3=Benbow|first3=Camilla|date=2009|title=Spatial Ability for STEM Domains: Aligning Over 50 Years of Cumulative Psychological Knowledge Solidifies Its Importance|url=http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/56143/spatial-ability-stem-domains.pdf|journal=Journal of Educational Psychology|publisher=American Psychological Association|volume=101|issue=4|pages=817–835|doi=10.1037/a0016127|s2cid=17233758 |via=}}</ref> A 2006 study led by psychometrician [[Robert Sternberg]] found that the ability of SAT scores and high-school GPAs to predict collegiate performance could further be enhanced by additional assessments of analytical, [[Creativity|creative]], and practical thinking.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Sternberg|first1=Robert|collaboration=The Rainbow Project Collaborators|date=July–August 2006|title=The Rainbow Project: Enhancing the SAT through assessments of analytical, practical, and creative skills|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016028960600002X|journal=Intelligence|volume=34|issue=4|pages=321–350|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2006.01.002|access-date=August 26, 2021|archive-date=August 26, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210826214033/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016028960600002X|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Dance-2021">{{Cite news|last=Dance|first=Amber|date=July 15, 2021|title=Has the Pandemic Put an End to the SAT and ACT?|work=Smithsonian Magazine|url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/has-pandemic-put-end-to-sat-act-180978167/|access-date=August 26, 2021|archive-date=August 26, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210826214036/https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/has-pandemic-put-end-to-sat-act-180978167/|url-status=live}}</ref>

Experimental psychologist Meredith Frey noted that while advances in education research and neuroscience can help incrementally improve the ability to predict scholastic achievement in the future, the SAT or other standardized tests likely will remain a valuable tool to build upon.<ref name="Frey-2019" /> In a 2014 op-ed for ''The New York Times'', psychologist John D. Mayer called the predictive powers of the SAT "an astonishing achievement" and cautioned against making it and other standardized tests optional.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Mayer|first=John D.|date=March 10, 2014|title=We Need More Tests, Not Fewer|work=The New York Times|department=Op-ed|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/opinion/we-need-more-tests-not-fewer.html|access-date=August 31, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210829212438/https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/opinion/we-need-more-tests-not-fewer.html|archive-date=August 29, 2021}}</ref><ref name="Hambrick-2014" /> [[#By researchers|Research]] by psychometricians David Lubinsky, Camilla Benbow, and their colleagues has shown that the SAT could even predict life outcomes beyond university.<ref name="Hambrick-2014" />