Mr. WEISS. Thank you, Dr. Casteen.
Mr. Sjogren?

STATEMENT OF CLIFF SJOGREN, DIRECTOR OF ADMISSIONS, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

Mr. SJOGREN. Mr. Weiss, my name is Cliff Sjogren, director of admissions at the University of Michigan, and president of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Offi

cers.

I appreciate this opportunity to testify on H.R. 1662.

My comments will supplement rather than summarize the more generalized statement that was submitted earlier, and I will speak from the perspective as an undergraduate admissions officer.

The University of Michigan is a large, public supported university that practices a highly selective admissions policy. We are selective because the number of applications from qualified students far exceeds the places available.

The University of Michigan is also characterized by a great diversity in terms of the racial, economic, ethnic, age, and geographical composition of the student population.

AACRAO, founded in 1910, is an important higher educational association with over 7,000 members representing over 2,000 colleges and universities. AACRAO is a member of the ACE secretariat.

I would like to mention that this statement has been prepared after I have thoroughly examined the previous testimony since 1979, both pro and con, and I might add I have learned a great deal from that examination, and my comments today are going to be directed toward those critical and controversial issues that I saw as important in that earlier testimony.

My colleagues at the university and in AACRAO share with the sponsors of H.R. 1662 their wishes to insure equal access for all Americans to educational opportunities of high quality. As we pursue that lofty goal, we are continually reminded of the fragile nature of standard measurements of educational achievement, but we will challenge any effort to remove those evaluative devices.

I will, therefore, speak in opposition to H.R. 1662. Some provisions of that proposed legislation if enacted would severely restrict our ability to carry out our responsibilities to conduct and improve educational access for the citizens of this country.

Specifically, I refer to sections 3(A) 3 and 4 which reveal a serious misunderstanding on how tests are actually used or what admissions officers expect from them and section 5(A) (1) and (2) test disclosure provisions, which will likely reduce test flexibility in terms of the numbers and locations of test sites would also increase costs and add little, I feel, if any, benefits to consumers beyond those now provided by the recently disclosed plan by ETS to disclose test answers.

At first glance an admissions officer might assume that H.R. 1662 is an antitesting effort rather than a consumer interest proposal. Indeed, the catch phrase associated with this effort is "truth in testing," which implies that existing tests are untruthful.

I shall assume that H.R. 1662 is not an antitesting bill and demonstrate, I hope, that consumer interests will best be served by properly used and educationally reliable standardized tests.

As an admissions officer, I hope we can preserve the educational features of testing, however, because I feel a few of the provisions in the proposal are counter to sound educational principles, my testimony will in part be a defense of currently practiced responsible college admissions testing.

A key provision of H.R. 1662 is test item and answer disclosure. If the committee feels that such disclosures serve consumer interests, the recent actions taken by the College Board and ETS in its announced plans for the 1981-82 administration of the Scholastic Aptitude Tests, should satisfy that provision of the proposal.

The College Board reports that students taking the SAT's on five testing dates will have the opportunity to obtain questions, the answers, and their responses on test items. The dates selected will affect approximately 75 percent of all SAT takers in 1981-82. It is a responsible initiative that will allow the ETS to maintain test integrity and important data for test validity. There is little evidence, however, that test item and answer disclosure will "demonstrate" the process.

The College Board found that in New York where similar legislation was passed only 5 percent of the test takers requested the service during the first three administrations. Further, the average median family income of all test takers was $24,500, while that reported by requesters was $32,300.

Orientals and whites requested disclosure at a substantially higher rate than blacks and Puerto Ricans. Of all students who took the SAT's during those three administrations only 2.2 percent of the Puerto Ricans and only 1.5 percent of the blacks requested test item, answer, and their responses be made available to them. The best predictor of academic behavior is previous academic behavior. Nearly all colleges and universities that employ selective admissions base decisions on a complex and interrelated set of factors that combine to provide evidence of academic potential and educational readiness.

The secondary school record, which includes grades, class rank, selection of courses, and the educational standard of the high school, provide the most significant influence on admission decisions. The entrance test, in varying degrees, will also be an important factor in many cases. Numerous studies have proven that standardized tests when properly used significantly improve the capability of predicting academic success in college.

The importance of the test score diminishes, however, as consistency and quality, both at high and low levels, are revealed in the high school record. It frequently occurs that a student with borderline grades, or one from an unaccredited, rural, or innercity school will demonstrate very high promise by scoring well on a test.

That student would probably be overlooked if test scores were not a part of the process. Admissions officers generally consider low test scores as ambiguous and high scores, on reliable tests, as relatively free of ambiguities. For minority students, for poor students, and rural students coming out of very small high schools,

test scores, it has been our experience, will tend to work for those students rather than against those students.

Reliable test data helps hold back the negative influences of grade inflation. It would be impossible for the University of Michigan, for example, to assess the quality of the more than 1,000 high schools from which applications are received. Standardized measurements are needed to maintain our efforts to treat fairly all candidates for admission and to not rely solely on subjective teacher evaluations.

Interestingly, if we were to remove tests from the admissions decision, it would be likely that students coming out of the preparatory schools, private, prestigious schools, would have a clear advantage over students coming out of schools where counselors were less sophisticated, lower paid, and did not have the ability to articulate thoughts on evaluations and the types of commentary that we typically get out of the more suburban schools.

The admissions process at Michigan, therefore, depends on and is strengthened by a relatively low cost, frequently administered examination plan that will allow students to demonstrate their aptitudes and achievements without coming to Ann Arbor for a locally constructed and administered entrance test. Standardized examinations were originally designed with that convenience for the student in mind.

an

Also, test information, when properly displayed in when institution's preapplication literature, will allow and encourage students to "select a college." One might argue that the ultimate in consumerism is to require institutions to display a profile on which are described important institutional characteristics, thereby allowing self-selection to become the single most significant factor in the process.

Finally, a few comments on some things that admissions officers agree tests cannot do. Generally, college entrance tests cannot help predict success in a career. Tests are of little value in predicting academic achievement beyond one year of college, but for freshmen, particularly, that one year is critical.

Tests are almost useless when used as a sole criterion for admission. A recent AACRAO/College Board survey revealed that less than 2 percent of U.S. higher educational institutions consider tests as the single most important criterion in the selection process. Probably none consider tests as the only criterion.

Tests should not, and generally are not, interpreted as specific scores but rather as ranges within which falls the margin of error. Thus, it is unlikely that the occasional incorrect answer that surfaces will influence an admissions decision.

Tests administered by companies that do not provide students, counselors, and admissions personnel with complete descriptions as generally described in H.R. 1662, section 3, with some exceptions in provisions section 3A (3) and (4), should be removed from the market and the companies responsible should be punished.

Failure to obtain admission to a college of first choice because of unacceptable academic qualifications will almost always be disappointing to the applicant and sometimes traumatic. Dismissal from a college because of insufficient ability or preparation will almost always be traumatic and sometimes tragic.

Properly developed and administered tests when fully understood by the student and admissions officer will greatly increase the probability that the college choice will be a wise one. There have been abuses in the past, and there will undoubtedly be some, although fewer, I suspect, in the future.

The responsible testing agencies, however, have responded quickly and positively to the issue of test misuse. Admissions personnel have been increasingly knowledgeable on what tests can and cannot do and are adjusting their practices accordingly. And the public attention that has focused on this critical issue in recent months will likely flush out further abuse.

Past experience has shown that when well-intentioned laws are submitted to the regulatory agencies for the preparation of the implementation plan, the intent of Congress is frequently misunderstood or ignored.

Traditionally, education in the United States has been relatively free of unnecessary political influence. That is a tradition which must be preserved as it has served this country well.

We would do well to remember that at the turn of the century liberal and progressive thinkers demanded that a national testing plan be devised to encourage college access on the basis of demonstrated ability and not as was practiced at that time by chance of birth or attendance at the proper prep schools.

Let us not return to the 19th century.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Cliff Sjogren follows:]

91-170 0-82--15

I SUBMIT THIS STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD FIRST AS THE DIRECTOR OF ADMISSIONS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, A LARGE INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING THAT CONSISTS OF EIGHT UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES AND TEN GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS, EACH OF WHICH EMPLOYS SELECTIVE AND COMPETITIVE ADMISSIONS.

I ALSO TESTIFY ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE REGISTRARS AND ADMISSIONS OFFICERS (AACRAO), A NATIONAL, NON-PROFIT EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION WHICH IS COMPOSED OF APPROXIMATELY 2,000 ACCREDITED COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES THAT ARE REPRESENTED BY OVER 7,100 INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS FROM THE FIELD OF RECRUITMENT, ADMISSIONS, REGISTRATION AND RECORDS, STUDENT FINANCIAL AID, AND INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH AT THE UNDERGRADUATE, GRADUATE, AND PROFESSIONAL LEVELS, I CURRENTLY SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION.

MY COLLEAGUES AND I SHARE WITH THE SPONSORS OF IR 1662 THEIR BASIC PHILOSOPH! OF PROVIDING EQUAL AND THE BEST POSSIBLE HIGHER EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL OF THE YOUTH OF OUR NATION--AND I MIGHT ADD WE SUPPORT THESE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL ADULTS AS WELL. WE DO NOT SHARE WITH THE SPONSORS AND THE PROPONENTS OF THIS PROPOSED LEGISLATION THE THESIS THAT TESTS ARE THE SOLE OR PRIMARY CRITERION FOR ADMISSIONS TO HIGHER EDUCATION.

THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF AACRAO HAS REVIEWED CAREFULLY THE CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING THE INTERPRETATION OF ADMISSIONS TESTS AS DISCUSSED IN THE NADER/NAIR!! REPORT, PARTICULARLY CHARGES THAT ADMISSIONS TEST SCORES ARE GROSSLY MISUSED AS INHIBITORS IN UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS DECISIONS. AACRAO'S PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL, COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY, IS REPLETE WITH NUMEROUS RESEARCH ARTICLES EMPHASIZING A BALANCE OF CRITERIA THAT SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS, E.G., HIGH SCHOOL GRADES, COUNSELORS RECOMMENDATIONS, LEADERSHIP POTENTIAL, INDICATIONS OF LATENT ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT ETC., AS WELL AS ADMISSIONS TEST SCORES. ALSO, THESE JOURNAL ARTICLES PARTICULARLY STRESS THE PROPER INTERPRETATION OF ADMISSIONS TESTS IN DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL OF SUCCESS FOR MINORITY AND DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS. THE ASSOCIATION'S