I found this argument structure pretty ridiculous, along the lines of: correlation is not always causality, but let's just pretend it is and not report on any c

I found this argument structure pretty ridiculous, along the lines of: correlation is not always causality, but let's just pretend it is and not report on any changes in demographic qualities of student populations. "When the SAT was instituted in the 1920s it was done precisely in the name of changing the admissions process to a more egalitarian one....In truth, the SAT, which is thankfully being phased out at many schools, has had the opposite effect....While correlation isn’t always causality, economics professor Jesse Rothstein of Berkeley has called it a proxy for other demographic components and for high school resources." Overall, the biggest problems with this nonsense article are the common presumption that college admissions are supposed to correct for all inequality, conflating equal opportunity with equal ability, and a stated desire for a meritocracy while simultaneously rejecting any approaches to measuring merit that don't come up with an answer that equally represents every way he's decided to slice up the population demographically. Maybe what we really need is more high school admission tests, so we can keep pushing the problem identification further back.