USA Today (3/14) editorializes about the College Board’s recent announcement of plans to overhaul the SAT, saying that most of the changes being planned “won’t make much difference.” The paper argues that among the test’s “inherent shortcomings” is the fact that there tends to be a direct correlation between wealth and higher scores, saying that “rejiggering the test” won’t alleviate the “intractable social problems” that lead to poor academic performance. Instead, USA Today suggests, colleges should improve the way that they “misuse” the test.

Meanwhile, in an op-ed in USA Today (3/14), National Center for Fair & Open Testing public education director Bob Schaeffer writes that the SAT is “is supposed to predict college academic performance accurately and fairly while resisting short-term coaching,” but argues that it achieves none of these goals. He dismisses the proposed changes as “little more than marketing bells and whistles,” citing research indicating that such metrics as grades in high school are “better predictors of undergrad academic performance” than are college entrance tests.