What do you think?
Rate this book
The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy
A major work of social history that asks profound moral and political questions about what is right for American society.
This brilliant book shows us for the first time the ideas, the people, and the politics behind a fifty-year-old utopian social experiment that changed modern America.
The experiment-launched by James Bryant Conant, president of Harvard University, and Henry Chauncey, head of the brand-new Educational Testing Service (ETS)-was to use the then-young science of intelligence testing to assess and sort American students in order to create a new democratic elite that would lead postwar America to progress, strength, and prosperity. No writer before Nicholas Lemann has gained access to the archives of the all-powerful ETS, and none has understood the significance of this extraordinary drama. But now, in a remarkable synthesis of vibrant storytelling, vivid portraiture, and thematic analysis, he reveals this secret history.
Predictably, the utopian experiment did not turn out as planned. It created a new elite, but it generated conflict and tension, and American society's best-educated, most privileged people are now leaders with no followers.
Lemann shows that this American meritocracy is neither natural nor inevitable, and it does not apportion opportunity equally or fairly. He concludes with his own keen assessment of what the future may hold.
This brilliant book shows us for the first time the ideas, the people, and the politics behind a fifty-year-old utopian social experiment that changed modern America.
The experiment-launched by James Bryant Conant, president of Harvard University, and Henry Chauncey, head of the brand-new Educational Testing Service (ETS)-was to use the then-young science of intelligence testing to assess and sort American students in order to create a new democratic elite that would lead postwar America to progress, strength, and prosperity. No writer before Nicholas Lemann has gained access to the archives of the all-powerful ETS, and none has understood the significance of this extraordinary drama. But now, in a remarkable synthesis of vibrant storytelling, vivid portraiture, and thematic analysis, he reveals this secret history.
Predictably, the utopian experiment did not turn out as planned. It created a new elite, but it generated conflict and tension, and American society's best-educated, most privileged people are now leaders with no followers.
Lemann shows that this American meritocracy is neither natural nor inevitable, and it does not apportion opportunity equally or fairly. He concludes with his own keen assessment of what the future may hold.
406 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1999
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
August 28, 2008
Most nonfiction books are alike in that they present their compelling arguments in the first chapter, their conclusions and recommendations in the final chapter, and everything in-between can be skimmed to get a sense of the evidence used to get from point A to point B. BUT NOT SO THIS BOOK.
Lemann is quite possibly the most engaging nonfiction writer I've read, weaving a compelling and increasingly complex narrative that begins in the hallowed halls of the turn-of-the-century academic elite and ends up encompassing issues of K12 and higher education, desegregation, women's rights, affirmative action, and the entire class structure of the USA.
His argument, furthermore, is really interesting, essentially about how small groups of people with a certain set of ideals set in motion the entire structure of the "meritocratic idea" we take for granted in America today...specifically, the idea that a good college education = success. Before the 1940s, though, he argues, college was just a hangout for the wealthy aristocracy bound for national leadership, and intelligence was seen as counterproductive for such a task (hmm, looking at George W, maybe not much has changed). But thanks to a cabal of folks who wanted to make universities into the weeding ground to cull the best and brightest to be our leaders, we got the SAT and a whole change in the idea of admissions.
At first, such reformers are portrayed as underdogs fighting the system. As the decades pass, the system THEY create spirals out of control. Sure, colleges weeded and selected. But the "meritocratic elite" went on to eschew public service and go for moneymaking and the markers of "success", and therefore college became not about grooming for leadership as much as deciding who gets what slices of the economic goodies America has to offer. (Which in itself might not even be so bad if our education system was fair. Yet attempts to try and make it fairer via policies like affirmative action are violently opposed).
Somewhere along the line, the idea of school's purpose being "to educate all students" never gets much traction.
As an educator and someone interested in politics and history, this book was the perfect storm. As ambivalent as Lemann is about the new "educated Mandarin class", he certainly revels in being one of its members...*I* had to look up some of the words he used. Yet the highbrow style does not come at the expense of readability and, yes, even humor, albeit the dry ironic kind.
A must-read for wonks, teachers, wonkish teachers, and especially for students applying to college.
- DN
Lemann is quite possibly the most engaging nonfiction writer I've read, weaving a compelling and increasingly complex narrative that begins in the hallowed halls of the turn-of-the-century academic elite and ends up encompassing issues of K12 and higher education, desegregation, women's rights, affirmative action, and the entire class structure of the USA.
His argument, furthermore, is really interesting, essentially about how small groups of people with a certain set of ideals set in motion the entire structure of the "meritocratic idea" we take for granted in America today...specifically, the idea that a good college education = success. Before the 1940s, though, he argues, college was just a hangout for the wealthy aristocracy bound for national leadership, and intelligence was seen as counterproductive for such a task (hmm, looking at George W, maybe not much has changed). But thanks to a cabal of folks who wanted to make universities into the weeding ground to cull the best and brightest to be our leaders, we got the SAT and a whole change in the idea of admissions.
At first, such reformers are portrayed as underdogs fighting the system. As the decades pass, the system THEY create spirals out of control. Sure, colleges weeded and selected. But the "meritocratic elite" went on to eschew public service and go for moneymaking and the markers of "success", and therefore college became not about grooming for leadership as much as deciding who gets what slices of the economic goodies America has to offer. (Which in itself might not even be so bad if our education system was fair. Yet attempts to try and make it fairer via policies like affirmative action are violently opposed).
Somewhere along the line, the idea of school's purpose being "to educate all students" never gets much traction.
As an educator and someone interested in politics and history, this book was the perfect storm. As ambivalent as Lemann is about the new "educated Mandarin class", he certainly revels in being one of its members...*I* had to look up some of the words he used. Yet the highbrow style does not come at the expense of readability and, yes, even humor, albeit the dry ironic kind.
A must-read for wonks, teachers, wonkish teachers, and especially for students applying to college.
- DN
March 8, 2020
In his very well-written book, Nicholas Lemann examines the creation of the Scholastic Aptitude Test and the generation that got into Ivy League colleges due to their SAT results.
Although the idea to abandon episcopacy for meritocracy seemed noble and reasonable, Lemann argues that the SAT creators simply exchanged one elite for another. Before, the rich were accepted thanks to their parents’ money and their place on the social ladder; after, they were accepted due to their parents’ ability to pay for test preps. The universities didn’t get who they wished to get – a smart, ambitious student body ready to be the next leader of the country. As Lemann proves, the result of the experiment couldn’t get further for Thomas Jefferson’s ideas about a real “intellectual elite”.
Although the idea to abandon episcopacy for meritocracy seemed noble and reasonable, Lemann argues that the SAT creators simply exchanged one elite for another. Before, the rich were accepted thanks to their parents’ money and their place on the social ladder; after, they were accepted due to their parents’ ability to pay for test preps. The universities didn’t get who they wished to get – a smart, ambitious student body ready to be the next leader of the country. As Lemann proves, the result of the experiment couldn’t get further for Thomas Jefferson’s ideas about a real “intellectual elite”.
November 4, 2024
was only assigned to read half of this for class but i fear i’m still counting it…interesting topic but a little bit dense for my liking
January 7, 2024
I enjoyed this book for the history of the Educational Testing Service, the makers of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) it provides an account of the experience of well meaning people in politics.
The Big Test takes us from the time when the elite of the "Episcopacy" presided over America from the East Coast. College was for the few and the rich who spent their time on campus having fun and making social connections rather than achieving much in academics. Getting rich was hardly a goal for a collegian because they he or she was already rich.
Then a move came to create a meritocracy - where the elite would achieve their position through study and hard intellectual work. As a result the country would be lead by those who had earned their place at the top. Anyone who had the intelligence and drive could get on track to move up.
To provide the highway for this advancement of talent, testing stepped up and took over.
But the author believes that we've only traded one elite for another. Now the rich provide their young with tutoring and test prep and we end up with the rich passing their young through the colleges generation after generation as before. Though not mentioned, I think George W. Bush would be a perfect example of this, in fact a throwback to the old elite, shown by his admission to a carefree life at Yale with mediocre grades.
Nicholas Lemann would like to see higher education be educational and not simply a ticket to big bucks and career security. He longs to see education be broad and wide in a way that would make of colleges something more than occupational way-points, issuers of professional credentials.
The most engaging sub-topic covered in The Big Test is affirmative action. AA contradicts the whole purpose of testing to bring out the best and brightest. It does so in order to provide an alternate path for those who are not college ready simply by being exposed to a rich intellectual environment from the moment of birth. It is an admission that a rather narrow range of abilities are promoted by testing and that some accommodation must be made to create equal opportunity. But, of course, the danger of AA is in putting some ahead of others simply by reason of ethnicity in the hope that this injustice on an individual basis will make it unnecessary to have it continued in the future.
AA creates a perilous political situation and The Big Test follows the course of Proposition 219 (to kill AA) in California.
The issues that come up in societies will always launch certain individuals on remarkable careers and The Big Test provides many examples of this, particularly in the life of Henry Chauncey, who rode the wave of testing to the top of the Educational Testing Service. Yet as some are elevated, others are frustrated. We meet every variety in this book.
We get a quite detailed look at ETS, a non-profit that takes in money from every SAT test. ETS claims that it is impossible to study for the SAT, though the Kaplan test tutoring company has proven this false. There is the remarkable account of the MAT (Measure of Academic Talent) test that was developed by ETS that took into account the differences in background of test-takers and was able to isolate those who were likely to excel in higher education regardless of background. It was killed (by ETS) because it would have brought down the scores of the current high scoring pupils relative to others. Winners like to keep on winning.
Leavened with clever humor, The Big Test is must reading for those who, like me, want to know why America is the way it is. Things don't simply happen - people make them happen and often because they are obsessed. Personalities always play a large part; the best of intentions can be thwarted by foibles over which an individual has little control. Not only must the time be ripe for an idea, the person presenting the idea must know how to do so effectively.
Investigating how something comes to be, a book like this shows all the angles on a topic and can help one define one's own position, or change it. This is education at its best. This book puts the educational testing idea out on a big plate for us to examine in delicious detail.
The Big Test takes us from the time when the elite of the "Episcopacy" presided over America from the East Coast. College was for the few and the rich who spent their time on campus having fun and making social connections rather than achieving much in academics. Getting rich was hardly a goal for a collegian because they he or she was already rich.
Then a move came to create a meritocracy - where the elite would achieve their position through study and hard intellectual work. As a result the country would be lead by those who had earned their place at the top. Anyone who had the intelligence and drive could get on track to move up.
To provide the highway for this advancement of talent, testing stepped up and took over.
But the author believes that we've only traded one elite for another. Now the rich provide their young with tutoring and test prep and we end up with the rich passing their young through the colleges generation after generation as before. Though not mentioned, I think George W. Bush would be a perfect example of this, in fact a throwback to the old elite, shown by his admission to a carefree life at Yale with mediocre grades.
Nicholas Lemann would like to see higher education be educational and not simply a ticket to big bucks and career security. He longs to see education be broad and wide in a way that would make of colleges something more than occupational way-points, issuers of professional credentials.
The most engaging sub-topic covered in The Big Test is affirmative action. AA contradicts the whole purpose of testing to bring out the best and brightest. It does so in order to provide an alternate path for those who are not college ready simply by being exposed to a rich intellectual environment from the moment of birth. It is an admission that a rather narrow range of abilities are promoted by testing and that some accommodation must be made to create equal opportunity. But, of course, the danger of AA is in putting some ahead of others simply by reason of ethnicity in the hope that this injustice on an individual basis will make it unnecessary to have it continued in the future.
AA creates a perilous political situation and The Big Test follows the course of Proposition 219 (to kill AA) in California.
The issues that come up in societies will always launch certain individuals on remarkable careers and The Big Test provides many examples of this, particularly in the life of Henry Chauncey, who rode the wave of testing to the top of the Educational Testing Service. Yet as some are elevated, others are frustrated. We meet every variety in this book.
We get a quite detailed look at ETS, a non-profit that takes in money from every SAT test. ETS claims that it is impossible to study for the SAT, though the Kaplan test tutoring company has proven this false. There is the remarkable account of the MAT (Measure of Academic Talent) test that was developed by ETS that took into account the differences in background of test-takers and was able to isolate those who were likely to excel in higher education regardless of background. It was killed (by ETS) because it would have brought down the scores of the current high scoring pupils relative to others. Winners like to keep on winning.
Leavened with clever humor, The Big Test is must reading for those who, like me, want to know why America is the way it is. Things don't simply happen - people make them happen and often because they are obsessed. Personalities always play a large part; the best of intentions can be thwarted by foibles over which an individual has little control. Not only must the time be ripe for an idea, the person presenting the idea must know how to do so effectively.
Investigating how something comes to be, a book like this shows all the angles on a topic and can help one define one's own position, or change it. This is education at its best. This book puts the educational testing idea out on a big plate for us to examine in delicious detail.
September 9, 2023
Lee Coffin book lend #1. Of course, I’d find a book on the history of the SAT interesting, but I genuinely think more people than they would think would find this book interesting. Wonderfully detailed in the way I love history and non-fiction to be, it pulls you in with the history of the SAT represents a sweeping view of American meritocracy told through both arcs of history as well as individual vignettes (always a storytelling device which I like), ending in the climax of the passing of prop 209, which banned affirmative action in California (this book was published soon thereafter). I loved the “character“ of Jerome Karabel who wrote the other book Lee gave me, which made this feel like a prequel or something. Funny. I’d be very interested in reading a 20 year follow up to this book, up to this past June.
January 1, 2019
Most of the people I've seen who dislike this book ask, "why isn't there more data in the book," as if their opinion would be different if the data they're looking for was included. That information is both available elsewhere and wouldn't change their minds.
Lemann focuses on the creation the tests, what the creators had in mind when they created the tests, what the tests actually became, and what happened with the generation of people who entered college as a result of those tests. It's a great and useful book, especially if you're a person trying to improve educational results for all students.
Lemann focuses on the creation the tests, what the creators had in mind when they created the tests, what the tests actually became, and what happened with the generation of people who entered college as a result of those tests. It's a great and useful book, especially if you're a person trying to improve educational results for all students.
March 30, 2011
I've always been good at standardised tests--- ACT, SAT, GRE, LSAT. Standardised tests have been good to me, too--- they got me into an Ivy, got me into grad school, got me into law school. Of course...despite the four post-grad degrees, I still make less than the receptionists at major firms...and I'm not teaching at a good university in NYC or working for a major NGO. So maybe all the ETS standardised tests didn't predict my level of success or social value after all. Hmmmm... So reading "The Big Test" is rather a personal thing for me--- learning the history of the SAT and ETS and America's fascination with standardised tests as gatekeepers for social mobility.
Lemann's account of the growth of the testing industry is well-written, often witty, and well-researched. His account of how the SAT and its midwestern ACT cousin changed the way American universities selected students is fascinating--- as is the framing account of how American universities re-visioned themselves after WW-2...and the larger issue of how "merit" is defined in America.
Lemann makes a serious point in "The Big Exam"--- every society selects elites, but out of all the ways of doing that, America has chosen the strange route of using standardised university admissions exams as the route to societal success. "Merit" is always a justification, though societies have defined merit by bloodline or "character"--- America has chosen to define merit as a very narrow kind of academic potential, one that can be quantified and presented as "scientific". Lemann discusses the ways that admissions exams have both protected race and class inequities and tried to overcome them (i.e., by not allowing a candidate's background to be seen in a face-to-face admissions process). The first, more historical, half of the book is better than the second, where Lemann looks at the American version of Examintion Hell for various high school kids.
All in all--- a book worth reading if you're interested in how America chooses its elites and defines "merit", and a nice introduction as well to the ways the American conception of the university has changed since 1945, from being a finishing school for pre-determined elites to being a trade school for those who can be defined as having score-defined merit.
Lemann's account of the growth of the testing industry is well-written, often witty, and well-researched. His account of how the SAT and its midwestern ACT cousin changed the way American universities selected students is fascinating--- as is the framing account of how American universities re-visioned themselves after WW-2...and the larger issue of how "merit" is defined in America.
Lemann makes a serious point in "The Big Exam"--- every society selects elites, but out of all the ways of doing that, America has chosen the strange route of using standardised university admissions exams as the route to societal success. "Merit" is always a justification, though societies have defined merit by bloodline or "character"--- America has chosen to define merit as a very narrow kind of academic potential, one that can be quantified and presented as "scientific". Lemann discusses the ways that admissions exams have both protected race and class inequities and tried to overcome them (i.e., by not allowing a candidate's background to be seen in a face-to-face admissions process). The first, more historical, half of the book is better than the second, where Lemann looks at the American version of Examintion Hell for various high school kids.
All in all--- a book worth reading if you're interested in how America chooses its elites and defines "merit", and a nice introduction as well to the ways the American conception of the university has changed since 1945, from being a finishing school for pre-determined elites to being a trade school for those who can be defined as having score-defined merit.
July 12, 2012
If I could, I would probably rate this one at 3.5 stars. I picked up The Big Test hoping to use it for my literature review for my thesis, and thus found the first third of this book absolutely compelling. Lemann explores the history of the SAT, moving from its origins in the military during WWI to its use as a scholarship tool by the Ivy Leagues to the founding of ETS to its dominance of the national collegiate admissions landscape. Fascinating little tidbits - like the story of Stanley Kaplan, the Jewish tutor who inadvertently started the test prep craze - kept the first third afloat, but unfortunately I felt that Lemann lost his cogency with the rest of the book. I understood what he was trying to do, create an overarching story of how the SAT and new meritocracy was carried forward through key individuals, but his refusal to outline where he was going, particularly with the endless narratives about certain peoples' families going back generations, was frustrating. The focus on affirmative action and its place in the 1996 election was interesting, but I felt that Lemann moved away from what he claimed the point of his book was. I would have preferred he either write an entire book about the SAT and its history, or an entire book about affirmative action, or if he had more continuously woven the pieces together throughout one single narrative. Lemann also seemed to have a habit of making assertions without citing where his ideas or facts came from, something that normally I wouldn't have noticed, but as I'm looking for other sources supporting or not supporting the ethnic and socioeconomic biases of standardized testing, I was perturbed. If you want to know the (shocking) history of the SAT and how it became one of the most important determinants of your life, I recommend the first third of this book. Better options may have been written in the past 13 years though.
July 22, 2007
Some really interesting stories, but ultimately I don't think Lemann pulls all the narrative strands together like he did in PROMISED LAND. But I'm glad I read it for two reasons --
1) I was interested to learn how we as a nation talked ourselves into using the SATs and ACTs as the primary determining factor on where (and which) people went to college...
2) Amazingly, a wealth of information in these pages on my favorite current business leader, Charlie Munger of Pasadaena. A completely unexpected bonus.
Plus, some good material on the development of California's state run three tiered higher education system, and the man who essentially created it, Clark Kerr. Wish there was more in THE BIG TEST on how Reagan hustled him out of his job so quickly, though.
In all, a very enjoyable book.
1) I was interested to learn how we as a nation talked ourselves into using the SATs and ACTs as the primary determining factor on where (and which) people went to college...
2) Amazingly, a wealth of information in these pages on my favorite current business leader, Charlie Munger of Pasadaena. A completely unexpected bonus.
Plus, some good material on the development of California's state run three tiered higher education system, and the man who essentially created it, Clark Kerr. Wish there was more in THE BIG TEST on how Reagan hustled him out of his job so quickly, though.
In all, a very enjoyable book.
December 21, 2011
"The Big Test" is one of those books everyone should read. It proves how wonderful narrative nonfiction can be. It takes a seemingly small thing: the history of standardized admissions tests, and makes it about nearly everything that matters. Nicholas Lemann is a terrific writer, and one of the book's great strengths is the way he weaves together different people's stories to craft a broad and meaningful history.
Not only is "The Big Test" a great piece of writing, it raises important issues. How much of our success is truly earned? Does the American Dream really happen? For whom? The answers Lemann suggests are sometimes uncomfortable, and always thought-provoking.
Not only is "The Big Test" a great piece of writing, it raises important issues. How much of our success is truly earned? Does the American Dream really happen? For whom? The answers Lemann suggests are sometimes uncomfortable, and always thought-provoking.
July 13, 2008
On the summer that I took off for Iowa City, Iowa to write test questions for ACT, I also brought this book to read. I was on a mission to discover the bias of standardized tests, but I learned even more about educational opportunity and who really gets deemed eligible for an Ivy League education, affirmative action and California's Proposition 249 to eliminate it, as well as the insanity of the high-stakes Scholastic Aptitude Test. This is a must-read for any kid with S.A.T. anxiety.
November 24, 2007
This is an excellent history of the creation of the SAT and its forerunners, examining the theories of general intelligence testing, the social purposes of creating the exam and the growing political power of the Educational Testing Service.
August 25, 2009
Forget where I heard about this book, probably NPR. Interesting and thought provoking; however, the author's style and his flexing of his vocabulary- especially in first half of book- made reading the book like walking through a muddy field in loose wellies.
September 19, 2007
How the SAT is rigged... a fascinating look into the tests, its history and expansion.
I highlight fascinating, and not exciting in any visceral sense. Then again, it is about the SAT isn't it???
I highlight fascinating, and not exciting in any visceral sense. Then again, it is about the SAT isn't it???
February 7, 2010
A book every educator should read - actually, ever legislation should have this on his or her required reading list as well.
November 13, 2020
This was an interesting read.
The first half was very interesting, and felt like it could have been written by someone who could be called a "conspiracy theorist". The connections between the OSA and intelligence testing with people like Robert Yerkes, who was a friend of John Watson and did intelligence testing to place people in WWI, and the SAT were illuminating.
It felt in the first half or so, that we were addressing an important question, which was, basically; How valid are these IQ test and Pseudo IQ test (like the SAT)and what do they measure exactly? is it innate intelligence? Is it a grammar test? Is it Biased towards certain populations? Carl Campbell Brigham, the creator of the test felt that it was both biased and could not be said to test innate intelligence, However, Henry Chuancey and James Conant used it as an intelligence test when they Founded the ETS (Organization that test the SAT)
Later we learn about Stanley Kaplan, who was an SAT tutor that would improve mostly other Jewish kids scores by getting them to remember one question each so they could later study off the real test (the stupid goyim never changed the questions). We found out that the SAT's could be studied for (something that should be impossible if it tests for innate IQ) and it felt as if I was in the middle of a journalistic take down of Testing.
Then the Gears changed, not only did the underlying message go from anti-testing to pro-affirmative action, but the story telling became much less compelling as well. Instead of outlining the quasi conspiratorial and monopoly building practices of Henry Chauncy and the ETS, we were now focusing in on the Asian-America club at Yale, and Molly Munger's legal career.
Munger was the Classic Case of the Liberated woman, who works hard and is focused on her Career, but in a Candid moment in the book, maybe one of few on the treatment of Molly Mungers life, Molly looks in the Mirror and ask how's she's different then a Careerist women who dosen't spend enough time with her Children. Mungers Husband was a lawyer and her father is now worth almost 1.8 Billion dollars. When Molly confronted this midlife Crisis her solution was not to spend more time with her children, who rarely saw either of their parents but instead to devoted herself to the NAACP a low paying gig where she felt would would be making a difference. Apparently Motherhood, a no paying gig where Molly would be making a huge difference in the life of her Children was not in the cards, especially because of the feminist rhetoric at the time and Molly's desire to break glass ceilings. The book ended with a failure of an effort to appose pro 209 (a bill against Affirmative action in California) in which Molly plays a leading role.
Through all this I felt that the most important part of the book was dropped. I kept asking myself, are these test useful or not? throughout the book. In the Epilogue I may have finally gotten my answer. The epilogue focuses on a Girl named Lisa, a half Indian half black girl who played a huge part in raising Molly's kids when Molly was busy working. Lisa was a "beneficiary" of affirmative action and went to Berkeley. In an effort to become a lawyer, Lisa took a class to prepare her for the LSAT, where it was discovered that she was basically incapable of reading. It was suggested that she be tested for a reading disability in which case she could have unlimited time on the LSAT, which meant she could potentially becoming a lawyer, who was not capable of reading at much more that an elementary school level. At this point, the whole Thesis seemed to be filliped on Its head. Maybe the SAT us inherently useful, if the alternative is putting people into positions they are wildly unqualified for, like Lisa. Because of these conflicting propositions, it was impossible for me to get satisfactory answers to the original question.
The first half was very interesting, and felt like it could have been written by someone who could be called a "conspiracy theorist". The connections between the OSA and intelligence testing with people like Robert Yerkes, who was a friend of John Watson and did intelligence testing to place people in WWI, and the SAT were illuminating.
It felt in the first half or so, that we were addressing an important question, which was, basically; How valid are these IQ test and Pseudo IQ test (like the SAT)and what do they measure exactly? is it innate intelligence? Is it a grammar test? Is it Biased towards certain populations? Carl Campbell Brigham, the creator of the test felt that it was both biased and could not be said to test innate intelligence, However, Henry Chuancey and James Conant used it as an intelligence test when they Founded the ETS (Organization that test the SAT)
Later we learn about Stanley Kaplan, who was an SAT tutor that would improve mostly other Jewish kids scores by getting them to remember one question each so they could later study off the real test (the stupid goyim never changed the questions). We found out that the SAT's could be studied for (something that should be impossible if it tests for innate IQ) and it felt as if I was in the middle of a journalistic take down of Testing.
Then the Gears changed, not only did the underlying message go from anti-testing to pro-affirmative action, but the story telling became much less compelling as well. Instead of outlining the quasi conspiratorial and monopoly building practices of Henry Chauncy and the ETS, we were now focusing in on the Asian-America club at Yale, and Molly Munger's legal career.
Munger was the Classic Case of the Liberated woman, who works hard and is focused on her Career, but in a Candid moment in the book, maybe one of few on the treatment of Molly Mungers life, Molly looks in the Mirror and ask how's she's different then a Careerist women who dosen't spend enough time with her Children. Mungers Husband was a lawyer and her father is now worth almost 1.8 Billion dollars. When Molly confronted this midlife Crisis her solution was not to spend more time with her children, who rarely saw either of their parents but instead to devoted herself to the NAACP a low paying gig where she felt would would be making a difference. Apparently Motherhood, a no paying gig where Molly would be making a huge difference in the life of her Children was not in the cards, especially because of the feminist rhetoric at the time and Molly's desire to break glass ceilings. The book ended with a failure of an effort to appose pro 209 (a bill against Affirmative action in California) in which Molly plays a leading role.
Through all this I felt that the most important part of the book was dropped. I kept asking myself, are these test useful or not? throughout the book. In the Epilogue I may have finally gotten my answer. The epilogue focuses on a Girl named Lisa, a half Indian half black girl who played a huge part in raising Molly's kids when Molly was busy working. Lisa was a "beneficiary" of affirmative action and went to Berkeley. In an effort to become a lawyer, Lisa took a class to prepare her for the LSAT, where it was discovered that she was basically incapable of reading. It was suggested that she be tested for a reading disability in which case she could have unlimited time on the LSAT, which meant she could potentially becoming a lawyer, who was not capable of reading at much more that an elementary school level. At this point, the whole Thesis seemed to be filliped on Its head. Maybe the SAT us inherently useful, if the alternative is putting people into positions they are wildly unqualified for, like Lisa. Because of these conflicting propositions, it was impossible for me to get satisfactory answers to the original question.
April 10, 2022
Writing in a fairly accessible tone, Lehman describes the founding of ETS in the 1940s and the goals that the creators of the standardized testing movement had in mind when the radically reformed how American universities (especially the good ones) admitted students. These reforms were borne out of a desire to foster a “meritocracy” of talented people which they hoped would emerge from the universities and shape the post-war nation. Needless to say, things didn’t work out as well as they hoped they would, but the ideas behind their plan still loom large in American society. Part of the book examines the movement for affirmative action at American universities, which Lemann seems to think came about as a result of their heavy reliance on SAT scores.
This is a valuable chronicle of a unique part of American history which I don’t think has been sufficiently documented. As Lehmann notes later in the book, all of this stuff was put into place without political purview or open debate. Instead, a small number of men made some important choices that have had a major impact on American society for almost eighty years. And counting.
A few passages of the book are worth repeating here. Just for fun.
Regarding ETS founder Henry Chauncey:
“He didn’t believe that he and his colleagues had been explicit social engineers; they were simply trying to help the country” (120).
Though the book was written 23 years ago, much of it sounds chillingly contemporary:
“The psychological side [of being a new-style meritocrat” was… a powerful experience – being constantly evaluated as you grew up and then being admitted into a special group. One’s impulse was to go through life repeating the fundamental cycle of gratification: selective admission, followed by membership in a tight, reassuring (though rivalrous) cadre of similarly chosen people. […] At the same time the idea that you might be a national leader was still alive. You wanted assured success and security, but not just that. The most popular professions were not dentistry or certified public accountancy. You also wanted to matter, to be admired, to take a part in shaping American society.” (186)
But:
“By the 1970s there were already signs that the meritocratic order was not going to be so popular in American society as its founders had anticipated. […] The people selected for the elite were starting to look less like selfless leaders. They were on their way to making a lot of money, they took advantage of the tradition of draft exemptions for the brainy to get out of serving in the armed forces during the Vietnam War, they held themselves apart. And what had they done, really, to earn such privilege or authority other than to get high test scores and get good grades? The astonishing rise of Ronald Regan demonstrated that political careers were being built by people who were exploiting public resentment of this new elite.” (187)
Those of you interested in buying a copy should seek out the paperback edition, which includes a new afterward. That afterward takes the form of a fairly scathing indictment of using IQ tests like the SAT to select who gets put on the path to joining the “elite” of society. I won’t type it up here as I suppose I’ve quoted too much already. But seek it out. It is quite an essay.
A good companion to this book is “None of the Above” by David Owen. It was written about 15 years earlier and covers some of the same territory, but with a more irreverent tone. I reviewed that on Goodreads some months ago.
This is a valuable chronicle of a unique part of American history which I don’t think has been sufficiently documented. As Lehmann notes later in the book, all of this stuff was put into place without political purview or open debate. Instead, a small number of men made some important choices that have had a major impact on American society for almost eighty years. And counting.
A few passages of the book are worth repeating here. Just for fun.
Regarding ETS founder Henry Chauncey:
“He didn’t believe that he and his colleagues had been explicit social engineers; they were simply trying to help the country” (120).
Though the book was written 23 years ago, much of it sounds chillingly contemporary:
“The psychological side [of being a new-style meritocrat” was… a powerful experience – being constantly evaluated as you grew up and then being admitted into a special group. One’s impulse was to go through life repeating the fundamental cycle of gratification: selective admission, followed by membership in a tight, reassuring (though rivalrous) cadre of similarly chosen people. […] At the same time the idea that you might be a national leader was still alive. You wanted assured success and security, but not just that. The most popular professions were not dentistry or certified public accountancy. You also wanted to matter, to be admired, to take a part in shaping American society.” (186)
But:
“By the 1970s there were already signs that the meritocratic order was not going to be so popular in American society as its founders had anticipated. […] The people selected for the elite were starting to look less like selfless leaders. They were on their way to making a lot of money, they took advantage of the tradition of draft exemptions for the brainy to get out of serving in the armed forces during the Vietnam War, they held themselves apart. And what had they done, really, to earn such privilege or authority other than to get high test scores and get good grades? The astonishing rise of Ronald Regan demonstrated that political careers were being built by people who were exploiting public resentment of this new elite.” (187)
Those of you interested in buying a copy should seek out the paperback edition, which includes a new afterward. That afterward takes the form of a fairly scathing indictment of using IQ tests like the SAT to select who gets put on the path to joining the “elite” of society. I won’t type it up here as I suppose I’ve quoted too much already. But seek it out. It is quite an essay.
A good companion to this book is “None of the Above” by David Owen. It was written about 15 years earlier and covers some of the same territory, but with a more irreverent tone. I reviewed that on Goodreads some months ago.
March 3, 2024
The Big Test is a worthwhile history of the development of standardized tests for college admissions in the United States.
Lemann is a comprehensive researcher and a talented, engaging storyteller. In this book, he tells the surprising story (surprising, at least, to me) about how elite colleges used to not even try to be for the academic elite of the country but for the social elites, and how in the postwar generation, this elite intentionally engineered a new elite for the country of academic meritocracy, which opened up its own host of advantages and new challenges.
The way that this new meritocracy impacted American Jewish history is not a major focus of the book, but it comes up all the time and is fascinating.
I have a whole new perspective about how the SAT changed what America is, and about how and why the old order of the "Episcopacy" managed, in its own conservative way, to effectively lead the country in pursuit of American values in the generations before the meritocracy.
Lemann is a comprehensive researcher and a talented, engaging storyteller. In this book, he tells the surprising story (surprising, at least, to me) about how elite colleges used to not even try to be for the academic elite of the country but for the social elites, and how in the postwar generation, this elite intentionally engineered a new elite for the country of academic meritocracy, which opened up its own host of advantages and new challenges.
The way that this new meritocracy impacted American Jewish history is not a major focus of the book, but it comes up all the time and is fascinating.
I have a whole new perspective about how the SAT changed what America is, and about how and why the old order of the "Episcopacy" managed, in its own conservative way, to effectively lead the country in pursuit of American values in the generations before the meritocracy.
June 20, 2024
A wonderful book about the unintended consequences and the defeat of best intentions. Some of the beginning, which focused on the history of testing and philosophy behind it, was quite interesting. The middle section lagged considerably, but toward the end when the topic was affirmative action the story was quite compelling. Most interesting: the MAT which estimated scores based on income and paresnts education (Measure of Academic Talent) and was the smae across races, but rejected because angry white parents might object. Lemann doesn't buy that IQs equal merit, and his thoughtful afterward should be read by all policy makers. It is hard for me, an excellent test-taker, to admit it, but I think those tests are somewhat bogus.
October 11, 2020
There are some good things about this book on meritocracy in American education. However, the book tries to do too many things. The story is disjointed and jumps from topic to topic. The reason I picked up this book was to learn something more about the genesis of aptitude testing. Unfortunately, this is the weakest part of the book. The discussion of the history of testing is confusing with lots of names but not a lot of insight. The portion of the book covering Prop 209 in California is engaging but lacks depth. Unlike a lot of authors, Nicholas Lemann knows how to write. It is unfortunate that he wasted his talents on this disorganized and unfocused book.
January 1, 2022
I feel bad. I had a hard time with this book, and I don't know why. I should have loved it, but I think because I thought it was just about standardized testing I was confused when the author introduced all of the characters in the middle, and then had most of the rest of the book focus on affirmative action. I mean, both the histories of standardized testing and affirmative action are super interesting, and they certainly are intertwined with one another, but for some reason I just couldn't get engrossed in the book.
May 11, 2018
Very interesting and engaging read, chronicling the foundation of the Educational Testing Service, evolution of university education, and the fight for affirmative action. Lemann manages to combine historical explanation with individual mini-biographies of the key players involved, connecting individual lives and aspirations to the collective arc of history - making the book informative and also entertaining.
January 10, 2024
First ¼ was really boring for me because just talking about all the WASPy men that started the American education system. Gets really interesting when they start to talk about quota systems in schools and how testing butted heads with segregation and desegregation in higher ed. Last ¼ kinda fell off and got boring again. He kinda lost his train of thought toward the end
August 14, 2022
Using this to support lectures for my fall course this year on inequality in higher education. This is a richly narrated account of how modern standardized testing came to be and the built-in biases it contains.
August 13, 2018
Fascinating read about the origins of the SAT.
Read
December 27, 2022Also read this for class. Ahg
January 15, 2013
This book explores the evolution of the U.S. "aristocracy" to a "meritocracy." The “aristocracy” being the wealthy WASP families, who for generations had attended the same elite prep schools and colleges (Harvard, Yale, Princeton..) Before WWII, there was no attempt to include intelligent non-elites into this mix and the book includes many anecdotes about how little these elites actually worked vs. played, and how unconcerned they were with obtaining employment after college, because they were either independently wealthy or they had a family business to join. In short, it was truly an aristocracy, rather than meritocracy.
The end of WWII and the influx of men bearing GI bills and a few forward thinking members of the aristocracy combined to fundamentally alter the process for accessing higher education and the width of the open entrance gate. The original idea was to find a handful of brilliant souls languishing in lower socioeconomic conditions and offer them the golden ticket. Put crassly (not by me), they would begin “raking genius’ from the rubbish.” This idea evolved into a test to - purportedly objectively - rank all college applicants in order to truly view applicants based on merit, rather than heritage. The SAT became the race to win, with the ACT closely behind. Notably, all of this enormously changed higher education in the US and all of it was accomplished with no governmental inquiries or policy reports demanding one direction versus another. Put another way, the critical government function of determining the allocation of its funding for educating its citizens was privatized and subject to little to no public scrutiny or input.
I started this book a decade ago but got bogged down in Part one because I really didn’t care that the Harvard guy had gotten remarried and had 4 daughters. I did care that Stanley Kaplan started his test prep factory to serve the middle class and that the ACT began as the public school testing organization, as opposed to the SAT’s use primarily originating in the wealthy private schools. But these facts were a tad buried.
Part 2 of the book is particularly interesting for Californians as it reviews the development of UC’s “Master Plan” of education, followed by the affirmative action struggles of the 1990’s. I graduated from SF State and then from a UC grad school (which I got into largely based on test results acquired after taking a Kaplan’s course), my daughter is a current UC student and I was very active in the struggle to save affirmative action - so the “gossip” in this section was welcome by me, but I can imagine it might bore others.
I rated this book “amazing” because it connected huge dots in my thinking: This book asserts that in the early - mid 1960’s, the federal government would have welcomed increasing federal funds to public education, which is largely locally financed. In order to justify the funding, it commissioned a study. The resulting Coleman Report analyzed the data correlating school funding with achievement and concluded that correlation was lacking! Consequently, the argument continues, the feds had no basis for arguing that federal funding for poor and minority public education was required. However, the book asserts, the federal government remained interested in helping minorities to succeed (this is after the post-Brown v. Board of Ed and black riots days), so the idea of affirmative action became the path. And, the funding of public education remained a local affair, which inherently creates great disparities since the wealthy tend to prefer to live among their own kind. As noted above, I was a strong affirmative action advocate when its challengers arrived. And, I remain an affirmative action advocate. However, it is clear that it should not and can not be the primary action to achieve “equality of result” that our nation takes. I really want to look further into the Coleman report and varying analyses of the data and further studies related to school funding and achievement. I believe that “quality education” (of the type the elites provide their own children) can significantly reduce the achievement gap. It's not the only answer, of course, education politics and policy is so difficult because of the humanity of the situation - you are dealing with some children who are homeless, abused, whose parents are gone or incarcerated - can these human realities be remedied with funding? Let’s try. Affirmative action has merit because diversity is worth fighting for in its own right. But, it comes with heavy baggage for those it blesses and bitterness for the white lower income who see their own dreams overlooked.
Really important stuff to ponder… Loved the book, despite flaws.
The end of WWII and the influx of men bearing GI bills and a few forward thinking members of the aristocracy combined to fundamentally alter the process for accessing higher education and the width of the open entrance gate. The original idea was to find a handful of brilliant souls languishing in lower socioeconomic conditions and offer them the golden ticket. Put crassly (not by me), they would begin “raking genius’ from the rubbish.” This idea evolved into a test to - purportedly objectively - rank all college applicants in order to truly view applicants based on merit, rather than heritage. The SAT became the race to win, with the ACT closely behind. Notably, all of this enormously changed higher education in the US and all of it was accomplished with no governmental inquiries or policy reports demanding one direction versus another. Put another way, the critical government function of determining the allocation of its funding for educating its citizens was privatized and subject to little to no public scrutiny or input.
I started this book a decade ago but got bogged down in Part one because I really didn’t care that the Harvard guy had gotten remarried and had 4 daughters. I did care that Stanley Kaplan started his test prep factory to serve the middle class and that the ACT began as the public school testing organization, as opposed to the SAT’s use primarily originating in the wealthy private schools. But these facts were a tad buried.
Part 2 of the book is particularly interesting for Californians as it reviews the development of UC’s “Master Plan” of education, followed by the affirmative action struggles of the 1990’s. I graduated from SF State and then from a UC grad school (which I got into largely based on test results acquired after taking a Kaplan’s course), my daughter is a current UC student and I was very active in the struggle to save affirmative action - so the “gossip” in this section was welcome by me, but I can imagine it might bore others.
I rated this book “amazing” because it connected huge dots in my thinking: This book asserts that in the early - mid 1960’s, the federal government would have welcomed increasing federal funds to public education, which is largely locally financed. In order to justify the funding, it commissioned a study. The resulting Coleman Report analyzed the data correlating school funding with achievement and concluded that correlation was lacking! Consequently, the argument continues, the feds had no basis for arguing that federal funding for poor and minority public education was required. However, the book asserts, the federal government remained interested in helping minorities to succeed (this is after the post-Brown v. Board of Ed and black riots days), so the idea of affirmative action became the path. And, the funding of public education remained a local affair, which inherently creates great disparities since the wealthy tend to prefer to live among their own kind. As noted above, I was a strong affirmative action advocate when its challengers arrived. And, I remain an affirmative action advocate. However, it is clear that it should not and can not be the primary action to achieve “equality of result” that our nation takes. I really want to look further into the Coleman report and varying analyses of the data and further studies related to school funding and achievement. I believe that “quality education” (of the type the elites provide their own children) can significantly reduce the achievement gap. It's not the only answer, of course, education politics and policy is so difficult because of the humanity of the situation - you are dealing with some children who are homeless, abused, whose parents are gone or incarcerated - can these human realities be remedied with funding? Let’s try. Affirmative action has merit because diversity is worth fighting for in its own right. But, it comes with heavy baggage for those it blesses and bitterness for the white lower income who see their own dreams overlooked.
Really important stuff to ponder… Loved the book, despite flaws.
October 20, 2014
I am revisiting (in 2007) this book because my alma mater, an engineering school, is making the SAT optional. This book has always been a favorite. Specifically, I loved the series of Atlantic Monthly articles, of many years ago, on which it was based. When assembled as a book, it suffered in that the last portion of the book deals with California's proposition 209. As mentioned in the one of the media review, it doesn't really fit. The original history content covering the first 50 years of the SAT was researched over many years from original sources, and is essentially definitive. In this section Lemann is actually quite objective, although it is ultimately not difficult to figure out where he stands. He is an outspoken critic of the test. It is a shame that he didn't keep the two separate because a dispassionate history would have benefited both critics and proponents better.
Other reviewers have made clear that this is not a technical book on the test, and its correlation with college performance. Nor is it a "prep" book. I have read such books, and they have their place, but this is a real contribution to the subject. The history is not so much "secret" as it has simply been ignored. The relevance of a decades old story might not be immediately obvious, but it lies in how the form of the test follows from its original intended function. The test has changed much over the years, but its history still leaves an imprint on the present. Does its history invalidate the test? Is the history just interesting reading? Has the modern test made the transition to its contemporary use? The reader should decide. I don't think anyone will change their minds about the SAT after having read this book, even though that was a likely intention of Lemann. Strong opinions will remain unchanged. It is still a story worth reading if you are interested in the debate over the tests merits, regardless of your position.
What did I enjoy most? I love the story of why we have to use #2 pencils; the role of Truman in the SAT; the meeting of Henry Chauncy (of ETS) and Isabel Myers (of MBTI fame). I found the personalities fascinating. It is like Watson's The Double Helix in its interplay of characters, but in this case doing social science.
There is another related book, while quite academic in style, that is a nice companion to this if you liked the same aspects of the Lemann book as I did. JoAnne Brown's, "The Definition of a Profession".
Other reviewers have made clear that this is not a technical book on the test, and its correlation with college performance. Nor is it a "prep" book. I have read such books, and they have their place, but this is a real contribution to the subject. The history is not so much "secret" as it has simply been ignored. The relevance of a decades old story might not be immediately obvious, but it lies in how the form of the test follows from its original intended function. The test has changed much over the years, but its history still leaves an imprint on the present. Does its history invalidate the test? Is the history just interesting reading? Has the modern test made the transition to its contemporary use? The reader should decide. I don't think anyone will change their minds about the SAT after having read this book, even though that was a likely intention of Lemann. Strong opinions will remain unchanged. It is still a story worth reading if you are interested in the debate over the tests merits, regardless of your position.
What did I enjoy most? I love the story of why we have to use #2 pencils; the role of Truman in the SAT; the meeting of Henry Chauncy (of ETS) and Isabel Myers (of MBTI fame). I found the personalities fascinating. It is like Watson's The Double Helix in its interplay of characters, but in this case doing social science.
There is another related book, while quite academic in style, that is a nice companion to this if you liked the same aspects of the Lemann book as I did. JoAnne Brown's, "The Definition of a Profession".
November 28, 2014
You know, the problem with most non-fiction writing is that it's presented as cold, hard facts with no real effort to captivate the reader. That's the reason why most non-fiction books are read by experts in the field or students in the field the book is covering; the book doesn't have to fully entrance the reader in those situations, because the readers are already fully invested in their field and don't need to be convinced to keep reading as long as the information is new, reliable, and useful. These reasons are also why documentaries are usually more interesting and engaging to watch than lectures on the same topic. Documentaries typically have a central story that they follow and that story is always resolved at the end. This keeps you invested in the documentary. The Big Test by Nicholas Lemann takes the documentary approach by following the life stories of the major contributors to the creation of the SAT and following those who shaped the SAT following its creation. Lemann also follows the people who shaped America following the SAT's creation and examines how America was shaped following the SAT. Lemann doesn't simply present the facts of these people's lives and the creation of the SAT however, he creates a narrative with the creators' lives that engages you and invests you in the story of the SAT. Lemann follows these people's lives and shows how the creation of the SAT shaped America and its entire culture. He also shows how, at the end of the day, this was all done in perhaps a futile attempt to create a true meritocracy, thus posing questions such as " Is a meritocracy truly achievable? If so how do we go about creating it?" He does all of this with flying colors and no part seems out of place or forced. For example, in the beginning of the book Lemann describes Henry Chauncey's, who was responsible for the creation of the SAT, state of mind during the period in which the SAT was created. This helps characterize Chauncey and helps us understand the SAT's purpose. So, in the end, I recommend The Big Test to anyone interested in how America was shaped by the SAT and the SAT's introduction into education and whether or not a meritocracy is truly possible.
June 30, 2021
Wow! Time changes everything! I just read this book again, and the second half is so powerful! I did not think much about Proposition 209 (Californians rejecting affirmative action in 1996). Lehmann tells the story as political backstabbing and the use of people and ideas for larger purposes (Democratic control of the Presidency--Bill Clinton).
Last year Proposition 16 was on the ballot to undo Proposition 209 (take it out of the Constitution). This must have been the least reported consequence of the 2020 election. Californians were asked "do you want to allow affirmative action." EVERYONE supported YES: all Democrats, but also these corporations--
AirBnB
Blue Shield of California
Facebook
Golden State Warriors
Instacart
Kaiser Permanente
Lyft
Oakland Athletics
PG&E Corporation
Reddit
San Francisco 49ers
San Francisco Giants
Twitter
Uber
United Airlines
Wells Fargo
It was voted down (affirmative action is still illegal in California) 57.2% to 42.7%. IN CALIFORNIA!!!
Read this
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Pr...
2014
The first half of this book is worth 4 or 5 stars (5 for me because I read the US AP tests every summer). The history of ETS is pretty fascinating. The book then lands in California's Proposition 209 story and does not end strong.
He argues that American meritocracy (started in the early part of the 20th century) sought to create a new elite based not on family but intelligence (or at least academic success). This elite would become Jefferson's natural aristocracy who would serve society. The SAT evolved from this to become the gate keeper of opportunity in the US.
My thought is that you need intelligence and hard work to be successful. The SAT is a cheap and easy way to measure intelligence. And being at the top 10% of your class would measure hard work. A better way to test high school students' readiness for college is have them take 3 AP classes, and see how they do on those. And compare those score to the SAT.
Last year Proposition 16 was on the ballot to undo Proposition 209 (take it out of the Constitution). This must have been the least reported consequence of the 2020 election. Californians were asked "do you want to allow affirmative action." EVERYONE supported YES: all Democrats, but also these corporations--
AirBnB
Blue Shield of California
Golden State Warriors
Instacart
Kaiser Permanente
Lyft
Oakland Athletics
PG&E Corporation
San Francisco 49ers
San Francisco Giants
Uber
United Airlines
Wells Fargo
It was voted down (affirmative action is still illegal in California) 57.2% to 42.7%. IN CALIFORNIA!!!
Read this
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Pr...
2014
The first half of this book is worth 4 or 5 stars (5 for me because I read the US AP tests every summer). The history of ETS is pretty fascinating. The book then lands in California's Proposition 209 story and does not end strong.
He argues that American meritocracy (started in the early part of the 20th century) sought to create a new elite based not on family but intelligence (or at least academic success). This elite would become Jefferson's natural aristocracy who would serve society. The SAT evolved from this to become the gate keeper of opportunity in the US.
My thought is that you need intelligence and hard work to be successful. The SAT is a cheap and easy way to measure intelligence. And being at the top 10% of your class would measure hard work. A better way to test high school students' readiness for college is have them take 3 AP classes, and see how they do on those. And compare those score to the SAT.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews