Greene is a UCLA alumnus who graduated with the class of
1999.
By Ethan Greene
David Burke (“Standardized tests receive low marks,”
Viewpoint, May 3) should do a lot less whining about
“fairness” and spend a lot more time more
studying. Access to a desired school of higher education,
especially professional schools, is not rightly based on some sense
of inherent ability.
The LSAT indicates, with a significant level of statistical
confidence, that the individual will succeed in his or her first
year in law school relative to the other students. The future is
never 100 percent certain, so tests like these provide a level
playing field and predict future success when weighed along with
your GPA. They reflect a combination of intelligence and
investment of resources in preparation of the test (time, money,
effort) that vary by the individual.
Each person values their investments differently. Burke has
allocated his resources and is now asking that ex post facto grad
schools compensate by changing their admissions practices to
reflect his valuations, in spite of the notices they have given
through past admissions of the types of factors they find most
important.
It’s a shame that Burke wants to excuse his performance on
a test and compensate by directly increasing the costs of reading
and verifying information in everybody’s “personal
essays.” Such schools would then become inaccessible for
those people whom Burke champions as victims of the current
oppressive admissions system, unless he thinks money is going to
grow on trees and subsidize these new cost increases.
Or how about raising the tuition to further marginalize the poor
and hinder them from access to higher education? But hey, as
long as Burke gets into the schools he feels he has an inherent
right to be admitted to, who really cares about its effects on the
poorer members of society? It is another middle class attempt
to marginalize the poor for their own gain. Burke should at least
receive some amount of credit for telling it like it is.