原文译文
What’s SAT
SAT是什么
Are test scores the backbone of meritocracy or the nexus of privilege?考试是精英制度的支柱还是特权的纽带?University of California’s review of its admissions procedures smiles on SATs加州大学对其录取程序的审核对sat成绩表示满意
1. LIKE ANY hotbed of scholarly activity, the University of California (UC) isno stranger to rows. Recently a debate over the use of SATs and ACTs, tests used in college admissions, has spilled out from campus and into the courtroom. In December a lawsuit denouncing UC’s use of the tests was filed in the Alameda County court. On February 3rd a commission reviewing admissions procedures recommended that UC should resist calls to abandon tests. More than 1,000 colleges across America have made submitting test scores optional for many students, though hardly any are completely “test blind”. UC is by far the largest institution to consider abandoning them. UC’s size (it has about 220,000 undergraduates) and prestige means others will watch what it does carefully.
同所有学术活动的温床一样，加州大学（UC）对争论并不陌生。最近，围绕大学入学考试采用SAT和ACT的争论已经从校园蔓延到法庭。去年12月，阿拉米达县法院受理了一起谴责加州大学使用考试的诉讼。2月3日，审查录取程序的委员会建议加州大学应该抵制放弃考试的呼声。尽管几乎没有大学完全“迷信考试”，美国仍有1000多所大学允许学生自由选择是否提交考试成绩。到目前为止，加州大学是考虑放弃考试的最大机构。加州大学规模大（约有22万名本科生），声望高，这意味着其他人不得不密切关注它的所作所为。
2. First administered in 1926, SATs have faced criticism for favouring the wealthy since the 1940s—an irony, since they were originally adopted by Harvard to expand its intake beyond the boarding schools of the north-east. While the College Board, which owns the SATs, has worked hard to eliminateegregious advantages for children from wealthy families—gone are the questions about oarsmen and regattas—there has been a persistent correlation between test scores and both socioeconomic status and race. The College Board acknowledges these correlations, but argues that they reflect “learning gaps that result from educational and societal inequities”, not bias in the test itself. All measures of college preparedness are affected by societal inequity, and it is unsurprising, if unfortunate, that students from poor backgrounds perform worse. Using test scores, the College Board argues, helps colleges to select those students most likely to thrive.
SAT考试于1926年开始，自20世纪40年代以来，它就因偏袒富人而饱受批评——这颇具讽刺意味，因为它最初为被哈佛大学采用，旨在将招生范围扩展至东北部寄宿学校以外。尽管拥有SAT考试的美国大学理事会一直在努力消除富裕家庭给孩子带来的过度优势（关于划手和赛艇手的问题已经不复存在），但考试分数与社会经济地位和种族之间一直存在相关性。美国大学理事会承认这些相关性，但认为它们反映了“教育和社会不平等导致的学习差距”，而不是考试本身的偏见。所有的大学准备措施都受到社会不平等的影响，如果不幸的话，贫困家庭的学生表现更差也就不足为奇了。美国大学理事会认为，通过考试分数可以帮助大学选择那些最具成长潜力的学生。
3. Academics have reached no consensus on how well the tests predict student success at university. Most agree on two things: that high-school grade point average (HSGPA) is the best predictor of college success and that the tests, when combined with grade averages, make predictions more accurate. How much tests add is disputed. The College Board claims that the additional predictive power offered by the SATs is significant. Many disagree.
关于考试在多大程度上能预测学生在大学的成就，学术界还没有达成共识。大多数人都同意两点：一是高中平均成绩(HSGPA)是预测大学成绩的最佳指标，二是考试与平均成绩相结合，可以使预测更准确。增加多少测试是有争议的。美国大学理事会(College Board)称，sat考试提供的额外预测力是很重要的。许多人不同意。
4. Even if the question of predictive power were resolved, another question arises about how good the tests would have to be at predicting college outcomes to justify their use. If they significantly decreased the number of successful applicants from already disadvantaged groups, such a sacrifice would presumably not be justified by a minor gain in predictive power. How institutions judge this trade-off depends on their mission, circumstances and the cohort they want to attract. This goes to the heart of an age-old question. Should universities consider themselves primarily as centres of academic excellence, and therefore strive to accept the students most likely to excel academically? Or should they accept a broader mission to improve society, which could mean sacrificing some academic excellence in the pursuit of a different definition of equality?
即使预测力的问题得到了解决，另一个问题也会出现，即考试在预测大学成绩方面有多好，才能证明其有效性。如果他们大幅减少来自已经处于劣势群体的成功申请者的数量，这种牺牲大概不会因为预测力的微小提升而变得合理。机构如何判断这种取舍取决于它们的使命、环境和它们希望吸引的群体。这是一个古老问题的核心。大学是否应该首先把自己视为学术卓越的中心，从而努力录取最有可能在学术上出类拔萃的学生?或者他们应该接受改善社会这一更为广泛的使命，但这可能意味着为了追求不同的平等定义而牺牲一些学术成就?
5. The plaintiffs’ arguments imply that no amount of predictive validity justifies the use of the tests in admissions. They allege that UC’s use of tests that are “demonstrably discriminatory” against “talented and qualified students” from poor families, under-represented minorities and students with disabilities is illegal under California law. “Use of the SAT and ACT is not just indefensible policy,” argues Mark Rosenbaum, counsel for the plaintiffs; “it is illegal wealth- and race-discrimination.”
原告的论点暗示，无论预测效度有多高，都不能证明在招生中使用测试是合理的。他们声称，根据加州法律，加州大学对来自贫困家庭、代表性不足的少数族裔和残疾群体中“有才华、合格的学生”使用“明显带有歧视性”的考试是非法的。原告律师马克•罗森鲍姆(Mark Rosenbaum)辩称:“使用SAT和ACT不仅是站不住脚的政策;“而且是是非法的财富歧视和种族歧视。”
6. In January 2019, long before the lawsuit, UC commissioned a task-force to review its admissions procedures. It found that the tests are as good as or better than high-school grades at predicting student outcomes. For under-represented minority students, students from poor families and students who were the first in their family to go to college, tests were better predictors of success, as measured by subsequent undergraduate grades, than for other candidates. What is more, because tests and high-school grades are only two of 14 factors used in admissions decisions, students in these less fortunate groups were often admitted at a higher rate for any given test score. Admissions officers took into account factors such as inequality of school resources and access to test preparation, and decided accordingly.
2019年1月，早在诉讼之前，加州大学就委任了一个特别工作组来审查其录取程序。研究发现，这些考试在预测学生成绩方面与高中成绩一样好，甚至更好。对于代表性不足的少数民族学生、来自贫困家庭的学生和家里第一个上大学的学生来说，考试是比其他考生更好的预测成功的指标。更重要的是，因为考试和高中成绩只是录取决定中使用的14个因素中的两个，这些不那么幸运的学生往往在任何给定的考试分数上都有更高的录取率。招生官员考虑了学校资源和备考机会不平等等因素，并据此做出了决定。
7. The report expressed concern that whereas 59% of high-school graduates in California were under-represented minorities in 2019, only 37% of Californian students in the admitted freshman class came from these groups. However, it concluded that the tests were not the main culprit. Three-quarters of the opportunity gap was attributed to factors that preceded admission, most notably failure to complete required courses. Test scores were thought to play some role in explaining the remaining quarter, though they were “not the primary barrier to admission”. The report concluded by suggesting that UC should “study the development” for a new approach to assessing students, suggesting that this could be implemented in nine years.
报告称，在2019年，59%的加州高中毕业生是少数族裔，而只有37%的加州新生来自这些群体。然而，它得出的结论是，这些测试并不是罪魁祸首。四分之三的机会差距归因于入学前的因素，最明显的是未能完成规定的课程。考试分数被认为在解释剩下的四分之一时起到了一定作用，尽管它们“不是入学的主要障碍”。报告的结论是，加州大学应该“研究开发”一种评估学生的新方法，这可能在9年内实现。
8. Far from exonerating UC, the report validates the decision to file suit, according to Mr Rosenbaum. He argues that the report merely shifts the blame for the inequalities in the UC system away from the “unlawful use of discriminatory and meaningless tests” and onto the California public school system. Given the sensitivity of the issue, the suit will be controversial and closely followed. It is unlikely to produce a satisfactory outcome. After decades of debate, experts are still unable to agree on either the facts or the morality of the matter. Given this, what hope have the courts?
罗森鲍姆表示，这份报告非但没有为加州大学开脱罪责，反而证明了提起诉讼的决定是正确的。他认为，这份报告只是把加州大学系统不平等的责任从“非法使用歧视性和无意义的测试”转移到了加州公立学校系统。鉴于这个问题的敏感性，这起诉讼将会引起争议，并受到密切关注。不太可能产生令人满意的结果。经过几十年的辩论，专家们仍然无法就这件事的事实或道德达成一致。考虑到这一点，法庭还有什么希望?
精读解析
篇章内容
P1：背景：最近一场关于加州大学使用大学入学考试的争议已经从校园吵到了法庭。
P2—P4：SAT的问题：SAT的歧视性问题；(P2)；SAT的预测力问题；(P3)；SAT的使用正确性问题。(P4)
P5—P7：对加州大学录取程序的审查：SAT预测力问题；(P5)；录取公平性问题。(P6-7)
P8: 总结和评价：这份报告非但没有为加州大学开脱，反而是对提起诉讼决定的支持；在该问题上无法取得令人满意的结果。
重点单词
meritocracy/ˌmerɪ'tɒkrəsɪ/ n. 知识界精华【例句】People have a certain kind of "merit" in mind when they speak glowingly of a meritocracy, and that kind of merit tends to run in the family.当人们称赞一个精英体制时，他们脑海中存在着某种"优点"，而那种"优点"往往在家族中流传。
nexus/'neksəs/ n. 关系；连结，连系【例句】the nexus between industry and political power.工业和政治力量的联系。smile on vt. 对...加以赞许(向...开颜)【例句】smile on sb.对着某人笑
no stranger to对……不陌生；对……熟悉【例句】The enigmatic designer is no stranger to scandal.这位神秘的设计师总与流言蜚语形影相随。
denounce /dɪ'naʊns/ vt. 谴责；告发；公然抨击；通告废除【例句】Union officials denounce the action as breach of agreement.工会官员谴责这一行动违反了协议。
egregious/ɪ'griːdʒəs/ adj. 极坏的;异乎寻常的【例句】Levels of executive pay are far less egregious than in America.只对富人们征收的费用又远低于美国。
oarsmen/'ɔːzmən/ n. 划手；划桨能手【例句】The skiff headed southward. The oarsmen took their time.小艇向南驶去，艇中的潜水人并不急子下水。
regatta/rɪ'gætə/ n. 赛舟会；平底船比赛【例句】Harvard and Yale met again in 1859 and 1860，but it wasn’t until 1864 that the Regatta became an annual event.哈佛和耶鲁1859年和1860年又进行了两次对抗，但直到1864年赛艇比赛才成为一场年度赛。
plaintiff/'pleɪntɪf/ n. <律>原告【例句】Hence the plaintiffs' search for less elusive accomplices.因此原告开始寻找神出鬼没的同谋者。
discriminatory/dɪ'skrɪmɪnɪ,t(ə)rɪ/ adj. 有识别力的；差别对待的【例句】The discriminatory policies continue to take their toll on migrants.歧视性政策继续伤害城市外来人口。
under-represented /'ʌndə,repri'zentid/ adj. 未被充分代表的;代表名额不足的【例句】Yet they are severely under-represented during efforts to resolve hostilities and on missions devoted to peacekeeping.不过，在应对针对女性的敌意方面以及执行维和任务方面，女性的参与率严重不足。
culprit/'kʌlprɪt/ n. 犯人，罪犯；被控犯罪的人【例句】But the biggest culprit for creating food waste is us.其实，我们才是食物浪费的罪魁祸首
exonerate/ɪg'zɒnəreɪt/vt. 使免罪,免除【例句】They should exonerate these men from this crime.他们应该免除这些人对这一罪行的责任。
重点句子
For under-represented minority students, students from poor families and students who were the first in their family to go to college, tests were better predictors of success, as measured by subsequent undergraduate grades, than for other candidates.
这个句子的主干是：For under-represented minority students, students from poor families and students who were the first in their family to go to college, tests were better predictors of success than for other candidates. 主干部分有一个who引导的英语从句，修饰students, 具体：For under-represented minority students, students from poor families and students 这里是并列的三个名词作介词for的宾语，整体在句子中状语，指明对象其中，under-represented是过去分词作前置定语，from poor families是介词短语作后置定语，最后一个students后面也跟了一个定语从句来做定语整个主句是为了阐释一种比较，所以为了区分比较对象我们可以简化一下这个句子：For A, tests were better predictors than for B。
这里as引导方式状语从句，并采用了省略的结构。当状语从句的逻辑主语与主句主语保持一致，谓语中含有be动词，或者是it is 的结构时，主语和be动词，或者it is可以省略。如果将这个句子补充完整：as tests were measured by subsequent undergraduate gradesbe measured by… 以…衡量这里就是指明前面入学考试的预测效果的衡量方式，是通过后面的本科成绩来衡量的。
