Which is also tied to socioeconomic status. If you can pay, your score will go up the more you take it, according to my experience, and the college board.
If you can't pay, you take it the one time it's offered for free if your school offers that. Then you get what you get.
I think we should learn from the gaokao and only test once a year. The fact that you can pay for more tests (and pay more for "score choice") is the most unjust part of the whole thing.
Counterpoint, you don’t want being sick or having a bad day to ruin your chances at what you’ve been working for for years. Also, being under pressure is generally not good for people’s ability to reason calmly - another reason not to make it so high stakes. So I really hope what you’re suggesting doesn’t come to pass.
We should probably make the SAT nearly free, though, if that price actually keeps people who’d otherwise go to college from taking it more than once.
A: Should your entire future job prospects be dictated by something that an abstract employer in the future might want? Or should the test we use try to get at what is really important; actual knowledge and skill?
If you can't pay, you take it the one time it's offered for free if your school offers that. Then you get what you get.