This makes no sense. Companies routinely use SAT scores in hiring. And even if they didn't, a school is under the same anti-discrimination laws (ADA, less relev

This makes no sense. Companies routinely use SAT scores in hiring. And even if they didn't, a school is under the same anti-discrimination laws (ADA, less relevant ADEA). > Companies will generally get sued Presumably you can back this up with cases. The USSC ruling in Griggs vs Duke Power [1] is pretty clear. IQ isn't used because it is a dubious measure, not 'very relevant' for anything. Actually useful metrics can be and are used. Your broader point is correct: colleges are, of course, forms of signalling. But IQ is a undifferentiated example. 'Top' schools mostly screen on the basis of wealth and social class. But my point is not about 'top' schools specifically, 99% of graduates are not at Stanford, despite what the valley tries to imply. [1] http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/401/424.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/401/424.html