Cracking the College Board: A Critical Analysis

In our modern education system, College Board has become synonymous with higher education. We take for granted that the organization partakes in an oligopoly on accredited courses and standardized testing, both factors that are significant in deciding college admissions. Students like us have devoted our time, attention, and money to it in exchange for reaching the doorsteps of our dream schools. We conform to its omnipotent presence—we hold its views, exams, and demands to dogma and avoid questioning its imposed authority.

Occupied by incessant test-taking, we lose track of what education is fundamentally about. Thus, it's time for us to reconsider College Board.

The College Board is best represented by its two most infamous exams-Advanced Placement exams and the Scholastic Assessment Test. These two exams, along with other services, generate over $1 billion of revenue annually for College Board. Its CEO, David Coleman, earns over $2 million a year. Despite these astronomical numbers, College Board remains a non-profit organization, allowing it exemption from federal income tax. Non-profit organizations are supposed to promote social or collective benefits. In this way, the College Board operates more like a business institution than a non-profit. It monopolizes the college application industry, reaping immense wealths each year from essentially every high school student's wishes to attend college. The cost for taking exams each year could easily amount to almost 500 dollars each year for a high school junior--the equivalent of taking

4 AP tests and the SAT. Five hundred could be a significant burden on low to middle income families, making the AP a necessary luxury for college admissions.

Furthermore, the College Board has been pushing its AP exams onto high school students across the socioeconomic spectrum recently in the name of equity and making college-leveled courses available for everyone. Meanwhile, a Business Insider study has found that the performance of students from low-income backgrounds is still significantly worse compared to their wealthier peers. In this manner, AP exams are not advocates for true equity as much as instruments for the privileged to attain their goal of higher education. Similarly, multiple reports from sources like the Washington Post and WNBC found that the SAT is not as much a measurement of capability as a judgement of income. Students from wealthier households are more likely to receive tutoring and preparation help compared to their counterparts, so the SAT doesn't stand as an exam of meritocracy, only exacerbating the wealth gap.

What does all this have to do with Deerfield?

First of all, we must recognize our privilege. Tucked away comfortably from most financial struggles in a private boarding school, we, perhaps as much as we don't like to acknowledge, are the primary beneficiaries of such a flawed system. We receive education that more than adequately prepares us for AP exams; we could readily acquire some of the best preparatory materials for AP exams and SAT; we are also more likely to score higher on these exams with easier access to tutoring outside of school. Therefore, as we profit off of this system that's molded in favor of advantaged students like us, we only perpetuate this burgeoning inequality, rendering our goals of greater social justice to mere chimeras. The substantial amount of money we commit to the exams each year grants College Board power and resources to further expand into more schools across the country, bolstering the tragedy described above.

We also owe responsibility to those less fortunate than us. As one of the leading preparatory schools in the nation, our actions set the tone for college admissions. As students, our commitment to the AP exams and SAT essentially voices our conformation to the faulty system injurious to students of lower socioeconomic classes. On the other side of the college admissions process, colleges likely regard Deerfield Academy and other preparatory schools as important considerations when adjusting its admissions policies due to our prominent status in college admissions throughout history. If we stand as bystanders in indifference to the difficulties experienced by those hurt by the system, we don't pressure colleges to make their admissions process more equal to all, and we signal to colleges that the College Board is an unblemished institution trustworthy of handling the college admissions process.

Aside from social justice reasons, the College Board has infringed upon our academic liberty through its imposed curriculum. The AP curriculum is very much a rigid structure that promotes skill sets and knowledge more particular to itself than anything else. In some cases, I think AP curriculum even sets boundaries to our learning. For example, College Board has long established history exams like AP European History or AP U.S. History, but only this year it started administering the AP African American Studies exam, all the while never having an AP history exam focused on Asian history. My point is not for the College Board to organize an Asian history centered exam, but rather to abandon the inflexible curriculum of the College Board all together. Because expansive subjects such as history are so difficult to encapsulate into a few courses and exams, it's better to leave the liberty of course programming to individual schools so as to not risk systematically ignoring certain topics as a whole.

Amidst the conversation about our responsibilities, the fact is that we, as Deerfield students, have also fallen victims to the College Board. I have spent countless hours reviewing and adapting myself to the materials and styles of the AP exams and the SAT. I have invested hundreds of dollars into taking these exams. Yet I did this all the while doubting the College Board system, as reflected in my writing. There's an urge that drives me to put in all the effort and money because doing so seems to propel my chances at college applications, however significant or not it may be. External influence and peer pressure also succumbed me to the supremacy of the College Board, as I don't want to see myself behind my peers in any way. Combined, we mostly take AP exams and the SAT not because we see it as beneficial, but merely because of the pressure both internally and externally.

Colleges must owe up to their enormous influence over high school students. They must change their admissions criteria to one void of the College Board in order to alleviate the unnecessary burden placed on high schoolers across the country and the globe. Strong statements must be produced from colleges to undermine the legitimacy of College Board exams and programs in college admissions. They must recognize the tragedy from the misplaced power they had granted the College Board.

KAYLEEN TANG/DEERFIELD SCROLL