Originally Posted by newB

This answer is going to be disjointed, mainly because so is your question(s).



To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Those who are good at standardized tests think that the SAT should be weighted more heavily.


You're getting closer. Now what about those with creative talents that are not physical and cannot be quantified on a standardized test? (See Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences)


You don't need to, because it typically isn't. There's a correlation between SAT scores and how well a freshman does their first semester - when they take the general "weed out" courses - after that, their curriculum is going to become increasingly specific to their interest and possible career goals, and the SAT scores become less relevant. Therefore, universities want to make reasonably sure students can get past that point by having a minimum SAT requirement, but after that they want students with strong aptitude towards what the school has to offer.

You mention marching band - typically very important to 'black colleges' and those that go to bowl games. All else being equal, a "marching band standout" would therefore be a better candidate for Alabama than say Harvard. Now suppose instead that rather than being a marching band standout, they are now captain of their school's 4-year-running tri-state-area championship debate team. Their chances of getting into Harvard just went up dramatically.