SAT Recentering Preserves Top-End Discrimination
False Assumption: Recentering SAT scores in 1995 and 2017 maintained the test's ability to finely distinguish elite talent without enabling admissions of lower-scoring activists.
Written by FARAgent on February 11, 2026
Pre-1995, the SAT was normed on elite prep school students with verbal and math means of 500. As public school students took the test, verbal scores fell to the 420s while perfect 800s remained rare, double digits annually. Anthropologist-geneticist Henry Harpending called the SAT-Verbal the world's best high-end IQ test due to its precision at the top.
In 1995, the College Board recentered scores, adding 70-80 points to verbal and 20 to math. This produced more perfect 1600s than Harvard slots. A 2017 adjustment added another 39 verbal and 18 math points, inflating totals by about 150 over pre-1995 levels. Harvard gained leeway to admit applicants like David Hogg with his 1270, equivalent to 1120 pre-inflation, over unnamed high scorers. US News shifted to reporting 25th-75th percentiles, masking bottom-quartile admits.
Critics argue this handed admissions committees power to favor 'character,' resume-padding activism, or connections over raw intellect. Mounting questions arise about diluted class quality, as Harvard sacrifices fewer prestige points for celebrities like Hogg, now DNC vice-chair.
People Involved
- In the years before the SAT changes, Henry Harpending stood out as an anthropologist and geneticist who praised the pre-1995 SAT-Verbal section. He called it the best high-end IQ test available. Harpending warned that recentering would strip away its real value, acting much like a lone voice in the wilderness. [1]
- Later, David Hogg entered the picture as a gun control activist. He secured a spot at Harvard with a 1270 SAT score. Critics point out this equated to a pre-inflation 1120. Hogg gained from his status as a leftist celebrity, they argue. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“Before scoring on the SAT-Verbal test was made easier in mid-1995, the SAT-Verbal subtest was, in the judgement of anthropologist-geneticist Henry Harpending, the best high-end IQ test in the world.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
“So, if Harvard now wants to admit the not-particularly-bright but enterprising celebrity gun control activist David Hogg, with his 1270 SAT score”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
Organizations Involved
The College Board took charge of the SAT shifts in 1995 and again in 2017. They recentered the scores, which inflated verbal results by 70 to 80 points at first and then by 39 more. Math scores rose by 20 and then 18 points. Growing questions surround whether this dulled the test's edge at the top levels. [1] At Harvard, the admissions committee leaned on this inflation, critics say. They prioritized activism and connections over raw intellect, admitting someone like Hogg without much hit to their high-scorer image. [1] Meanwhile, US News and World Report switched its rankings to show 25th to 75th percentile SAT ranges. This let low scorers in the bottom quartile slip in without dragging down the overall standings. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (3)
“After the 1995 recentering when about 70 or 80 points were added to SAT Verbal scores and about 20 points to SAT Math scores... And then in 2017, verbal scores were boosted another 39 or so points and math scores about 18”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
“The loss of resolution at the top of the scale handed immense power to the admissions committee. Untrammeled by the need to accept visibly superb minds in order to preserve prestige, Harvard could filter instead for "character"”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
“US News and World Report switched from reporting colleges’ mean SAT score to reporting their scores as the 25th and 75th percentiles, which sounds smart, but it really means they can pack the bottom quarter of their class with David Hoggs”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
The Foundation
By the early 1990s, SAT verbal scores had dipped into the 420s among public school test-takers. Poor grammar skills drove much of the decline. Recentering appeared as a sensible fix at the time. Yet critics argue it fostered a sub-belief that top talent was plentiful, reducing the push for perfect scores. [1] Before 1995, perfect verbal 800s came rarely, often in double digits each year. They held validity up to three or four standard deviations above the mean. After recentering, excess 1600s flooded in, and mounting evidence challenges the idea that high-end discrimination stayed intact. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“But Verbal scores crashed down into the 420s as more of the unwashed masses with their dubious grammar signed up to take the SAT.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
“SAT Verbal scores were so low before 1995, with the number of perfect 800s being given out annually barely into double figures, that the score was pretty valid out to somewhere between and three four standard deviations above the mean.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
How It Spread
The College Board pushed score inflation through its adjustments in 1995 and 2017. This change rippled out to elite schools. They began to stress resume-padding activism over pure test performance. Critics argue this shift spread the assumption that the test still picked out elite talent finely, even as it enabled softer admissions standards. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (1)
“It is under-appreciated how the SAT recentering of 1995 helped birth the elite undergraduate world of today, with its emphasis on resume-padding activism.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
Resulting Policies
After the recentering, Harvard's admissions process tilted toward certain traits. They favored applicants who had a parent fund a trip to Honduras or who started a non-profit by age 16. Pure intellect took a back seat. Growing questions surround whether this preserved the test's role in spotting top talent or just eased in lower scorers. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (1)
“Harvard could filter instead for "character" or "having had Daddy pay for a trip to Honduras to build wells" or "having founded a non-profit at 16!"”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
Harm Caused
Score inflation cut the apparent cost of admitting someone like Hogg. Pre-1995, his score sat 480 points below Harvard's mean SAT. Now it registers as 330 points off. Critics argue this diluted the intake of high-talent students. [1] In earlier days, Harvard chased rare 1600s for prestige. Post-inflation, they skipped over superb minds in favor of activists, and mounting evidence suggests this eroded the school's academic edge. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“in 1994, if the choice came down to admitting Hogg with his 1120 or Brilliant Noname, with his 1600, letting in Hogg would have sacrificed 480 SAT points off Harvard’s total numerator in calculating its mean. But these days, Harvard only sacrifices 330.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
“With only so many 1600s to go around, if other schools had them and Harvard didn't, that would dent Harvard's precious prestige.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
Downfall
Comparisons started to expose the score inflations by the late 2010s. Hogg's 1270 translated to a pre-1995 1120, critics noted. This highlighted how elite schools could admit lower scorers without much damage to averages. Growing questions surround the assumption that recentering kept the test's top-end discrimination sharp. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (1)
“by taking Hogg now, it’s sacrificing 150 points less off Hogg’s contribution to Harvard’s average SAT score than it would have 1994, when Hogg would have scored around 1120.”— The David Hoggization of Harvard
Sources
- [1]