> Skip to content
FEATURED:
  • The Evolution of Race in Admissions
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
ADVERTISEMENT
Admissions
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Show more sharing options
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Copy Link URLCopied!
  • Print

Facing Criticism, College Board Backs Away From ‘Adversity Score’

By  Grace Elletson
August 27, 2019
The College Board’s adversity score, intended to contextualize students’ performance on the SAT, drew complaints for oversimplifying their experience, among other concerns.
Joe Raedle, Getty Images
The College Board’s adversity score, intended to contextualize students’ performance on the SAT, drew complaints for oversimplifying their experience, among other concerns.

The College Board is walking back the single, overarching “adversity score” that it had planned to attach to students’ SAT scores after it drew broad criticism.

The proposed score was part of an Environmental Context Dashboard, a program the organization had tested at 50 colleges over the last year in an effort to help admissions officers gain broader context about each applicant’s socioeconomic background when evaluating SAT scores. The adversity score did not factor in race.

Rather, it grouped together data from the Census Bureau and public records about crime rates, median income, and parents’ education levels in each student’s environment. Those measures, combined with such other data as the academic rigor of a high school or receiving free or reduced-price lunches, were used to create a student’s overall adversity score.

We’re sorry. Something went wrong.

We are unable to fully display the content of this page.

The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.

Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.

If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com

The College Board’s adversity score, intended to contextualize students’ performance on the SAT, drew complaints for oversimplifying their experience, among other concerns.
Joe Raedle, Getty Images
The College Board’s adversity score, intended to contextualize students’ performance on the SAT, drew complaints for oversimplifying their experience, among other concerns.

The College Board is walking back the single, overarching “adversity score” that it had planned to attach to students’ SAT scores after it drew broad criticism.

The proposed score was part of an Environmental Context Dashboard, a program the organization had tested at 50 colleges over the last year in an effort to help admissions officers gain broader context about each applicant’s socioeconomic background when evaluating SAT scores. The adversity score did not factor in race.

Rather, it grouped together data from the Census Bureau and public records about crime rates, median income, and parents’ education levels in each student’s environment. Those measures, combined with such other data as the academic rigor of a high school or receiving free or reduced-price lunches, were used to create a student’s overall adversity score.

In the new program, renamed Landscape, there’s no overall adversity score, but all the other contextualizing data points remain the same. The College Board is also offering new guidelines about how to use the program and details about its methodology.

ADVERTISEMENT

In a news release announcing the changes, David Coleman, the College Board’s chief executive, said on Tuesday that they would make Landscape “better and more transparent.”

“Landscape provides admissions officers more consistent background information,” Coleman said, “so they can fairly consider every student, no matter where they live and learn.”

While some admissions officers involved in the pilot program said it had helped them diversify their enrollment, many others weren’t convinced of the program’s effectiveness. Some said the adversity score could oversimplify students’ experiences and cause them to face more bias.

Even with the removal of the overall adversity score, some remained skeptical. Robert A. Schaeffer, public-education director of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing (FairTest), endorsed the College Board’s decision to listen to the critiques of what he called a “simplistic score” but said it still fell short.

ADVERTISEMENT

The revised program, he said, doesn’t do enough to help disadvantaged students make it into college. In order to diversify a student body, Schaeffer said, admissions offices should aggressively recruit in underserved areas and make more scholarship money available to applicants who need it most.

The shift in the Landscape program “doesn’t eliminate any hurdles,” Schaeffer said. “In reality, it just provides a bit more information to put the hurdles in context.”

Grace Elletson is an editorial intern at The Chronicle. Follow her on Twitter @graceelletson, or email her at grace.elletson@chronicle.com.

A version of this article appeared in the September 6, 2019, issue.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Admissions & EnrollmentInnovation & Transformation
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Related Content

  • Let’s Clarify a Few Things About the New ‘Adversity Score.’ (First, Stop Calling It That.)
  • Why Are SAT Takers Getting an ‘Adversity Score’? Here’s Some Context
  • Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
    Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
  • The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
    The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
    Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  • Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
    Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2023 The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin