Standardized testing was designed to level the playing field across schools — to provide a common academic currency by which colleges could identify the next paragons of academia. But in reality, the SAT and other common standardized exams have been distorted into a metric that highlights privilege and preparation above real promise.
While standardized tests claim to assess academic aptitude, they more often indicate socioeconomic status rather than actual intelligence or academic potential and increasingly undermine meritocracy. Wealthy families invest thousands into test-prep programs, private tutoring, and countless retakes, thus inflating scores and deepening the chasm between privileged and disadvantaged.
The unequal and expensive nature of SAT prep is something that many LM students cannot afford and are tired of. LM’s lack of school sponsored SAT prep creates inequities for its students, perpetuating partisanship and promoting hypocrisy. How can LM pride itself on academic prestige if it promotes affluence over intelligence? To address this problem, LM must introduce school-sponsored SAT prep. Not only would this enable LM to live up to its vaunted image, but also would combat the plague of inequity that the SAT has come to symbolize. If LM is truly committed to academic esteem, it ought to offer equitable opportunities, not just flaunt advanced courses.
In today’s landscape, success is not merely a result of diligence — it’s often a matter of financial means. As a public institution dedicated to greatness, LM has a duty to ensure no student’s future is dictated by how deep their parent’s pockets are.
The SAT has, over time, ironically become a symbol of the very inequalities it sought to address. Research conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research displays a striking trend: SAT scores tend to increase in tandem with family income. One-third of students from high-income families scored a 1300 or above on the SAT, in comparison to only 5 percent of those from middle class families. The barrier is even higher for lower-income families, where only one in five kids even attempted the SAT. The inherently biased nature of this gap is not a result of natural drive or talent; it highlights a systemic issue rooted in privilege and the uneven distribution of educational resources, all while under the guise of objective merit.
Students from wealthier families can afford tutors and multi-thousand-dollar prep courses, whereas other students haven’t even seen what the test looks like. Furthermore, students coming from advantaged backgrounds have the ability to retake the test multiple times without financial burden. Since most colleges do not require all SAT scores be counted, those able to afford multiple retakes can essentially brute-force the system regardless of academic caliber.
To act as if these factors don’t influence outcomes is to overlook the real challenges that a considerable portion of LM’s student body faces. Many students are juggling jobs, family duties or simply can’t afford professional prep. Although only 6.8% of the LMSD population lives below the poverty level, the challenges that this population, and even the middle class population, face cannot be understated.
Some LM students are growing tired of for-profit SAT prep and rightfully so. As addressed in The Merionite article “Testing Troubles,” certain students feel the for-profit nature of SAT prep distracts companies from providing quality tutoring. Interviewed students believe that these industries focus on gaming the system, rather than fostering authentic education. Offering SAT prep through LM could help to mitigate this problem and enable students to prepare without the hefty price tag.
While some might argue that offering SAT prep through LM gives into a flawed system, in reality it will serve to better equip students to navigate the high-stakes testing they’re facing. Even though a small percentage of colleges are SAT-optional, the fundamental role of standardized testing in the admissions process persists, especially considering colleges’ reliance on SAT scores to determine merit-based scholarship. By not providing accessible SAT prep, LM is depriving its students of a significant advantage that can often influence not just where a student goes to college, but also the price tag associated with it.
Critics may claim that publicly-sponsored SAT prep takes away from “real learning” or reinforces the flawed nature of the test itself. In reality, such a perspective overlooks the practical challenges students encounter. High quality SAT prep, unlike expensive SAT prep that focuses solely on answers, doesn’t replace critical thinking — it actually enhances it. School sponsored SAT prep has been shown to amplify essential academic skills like reading comprehension, data interpretation, quantitative reasoning, and evidence-based writing. These aren’t just tricks for the test — they’re vital skills for college and beyond.
And whilst others may point out that some SAT resources are available for free online, some students may find it challenging to self-direct their studies; find quiet places to focus; and understand complex test strategies without guidance. Online resources are really only beneficial for those who have the time, stability, and prior knowledge. They’re a tool — not a solution.
Creating an SAT prep program at LM doesn’t mean overhauling entire curriculums. Alternatives include after-school prep programs led by current teachers, lessons during advisory, or collaboration with local, non-profit organizations that offer free, low-cost, or income-based prep options. No matter a student’s financial situation or family life, publicly accessible SAT prep allows all to benefit.
This is not simply about the SAT; it is about what kind of school LM aspires to be. Does it view academic success as a product of privilege or hard work? By choosing not to offer easily-implementable SAT prep, LM is willingly being indifferent to the hurtful status quo, something LM actively teaches against in its own English 1 curriculum.
Equity isn’t about giving every student the same resources; it’s about providing each student with what they need to succeed. The lack of SAT prep isn’t just an oversight — it’s a moral shortcoming.
For a school that claims to be well-resourced and forward-thinking, LM is neglecting its student body. The solution is not only achievable — it is long overdue. Providing SAT prep won’t fix every educational inequality, but it will chip away at one of the most persistent, measurable, and impactful disparities our students face. No institution that prioritizes privilege over potential can truly call themselves great. Even a small, school-provided SAT prep program can create a powerful statement: that LM recognizes inequality — and is ready to take action for equity.
