Letters

INSIDE THE NEW SATS

"It's high time we test students' actual knowledge and not how well they have learned to respond to multiple-choice questions." GUILLERMO HERNANDEZ Darien, Conn.

The New SAT is a disaster [OCT. 27]. At least the old SAT tested general reasoning, but the fresh emphasis on advanced math will force schools to speed up the math progression, which will cause even more students to fall behind and become mathphobic. We should achieve our current standards before we up the ante; if students are already stumbling, the New SAT may cause them to fall flat on their faces. ABNER MINTZ Laurel, Md.

Aptitude, achievement, potential and prediction are just recycled words in educational testing. The College Entrance Examination Board shouldn't waste money and energy worrying high school students and their parents with the New SAT. The test, in any incarnation, is simply another item for colleges to consider. The Ivies and other elite universities will continue to use an academic index, reject students with perfect SATs and accept whomever they want to achieve their ideal, perfectly diverse freshman class. Let's stop the charade; abolish the SAT. BILL TOUMEY Long Beach, N.Y.

The changes to the SAT may or may not have a positive impact on high school curriculums and on students' preparation for success in college. What high school teachers, guidance counselors, prospective college students and their parents need to know, however, is that successful performance, both in college and life, depends on being able to apply one's knowledge and skills to new problems--problems that are not scripted. Assessments of students' learning should focus on the ability to deal with unscripted problems, not just on finding (or guessing) the one right answer. Standardized testing should never be the primary focus of a student's journey to college. CAROL GEARY SCHNEIDER, PRESIDENT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES Washington

John Cloud's view of the New SAT provided a compelling account of the social politics behind high-stakes standardized testing. He also exposes an important tension within the New SAT's guiding principles. The College Board is right to be concerned about performance gaps among different demographic groups, but making the SAT more of an achievement test than a so-called aptitude test may exacerbate the problem. Changing the test to produce socially desirable results can distract attention from a greater problem: unequal access to excellence in education. Until the nation's schools begin providing equal education to all, affordable, effective test preparation may be students' best shot at leveling the academic playing field. BENJAMIN PARIS DIRECTOR, TEST PREPARATION PETERSON'S Lawrenceville, N.J.

I'm a high school junior. I've taken SAT prep courses but have a hard time remembering what I did last week. That doesn't mean I don't deserve to go to a first-rate college, just that I don't have a good short-term memory. The SAT ought to measure one's creativity and find out what an individual has experienced because that is what shapes a person's life. MEGAN WOLCOTT Pittsburgh, Pa.

The New SATs are testing more advanced math and higher-level reading skills, and to that I say, Finally! The controversy over possibly declining scores proves that it is right to make these substantive changes. It's a test; it's supposed to be hard! PETER MOTTOLA Neptune City, N.J.

As an English teacher at an 85% minority high school where an SAT score several hundred points lower than a perfect 1600 is a reason for celebration, I have seen many of our students with low scores make the dean's list at respected universities. Why? Because they have a passionate desire to succeed. That is the only standard by which they should be judged. The key indicators of a student's success in college are his or her determination and work ethic in high school. Perhaps college admissions officers should rely less on standardized-test results and more on making phone calls to high school teachers. We know our students' potential better than any test. STACY HAINES Tucson, Ariz.

WHOSE RIGHT TO LIFE?

The Schindlers' fight to keep their unconscious daughter Terri Schiavo on a feeding tube [Oct. 27] demonstrates how you can bring up a child only to discover that if she becomes seriously ill, you could have virtually no rights over her care. This is because if the child is married, you, the parents, aren't legally the next of kin. In the Schiavo case, who could possibly stand by while their offspring is starved and dehydrated because of the decisions of a spouse who has, rightfully or not, gone on with his life? The Schindlers are doing what they have to do. They cannot replace their daughter. SANDRA SUMMER-PARKS Yonkers, N.Y.

Doctors described Terri Schiavo, 39, as being in a vegetative state, but she was spared from entering the next world by the intervention of Florida Governor Jeb Bush. Nobody involved in this tragic case should presume the moral high ground. Close family members think if there is life, there is hope. Others, however, see a denial of the right to die with dignity. Bush family members are strong on the right to life. But that does not mean they or the Bush Administration thinks the state should pay for a national health-care program. That is anathema to these "compassionate" conservatives. Schiavo's medical bills should be sent to the White House. And how odd that religious people believe in heaven but don't want to see the hopelessly ill go there when their lives are clearly finished. RON RUGGIERI Cranston, R.I.

THE GREAT HALLOWEEN DEBATE

In his essay "Boo, Humbug!" Michael Elliott used the example of adults having fun at Halloween as proof of the "infantilization of American culture" [Oct. 27]. Shame on him! Why can't I dress up for one evening a year and have fun pretending to be something I'm not? For the other 364 days (and on Halloween day too), I'm a responsible, child-nurturing, house-cleaning, healthy-meal-cooking mother--and no infant, thank you! KAREN LEE Los Gatos, Calif.

As someone who had to face an organized day of Halloween events at the office, including breakfast, costumes, prizes and afternoon snack break--all intended to boost morale--I salute Elliott for his Essay. THAD W. RAUHAUSER Drexel Hill, Pa.

Elliott should lighten up. If the president can dress up like a fighter pilot, why can't the rest of us wear costumes on Halloween? We all need a break, and if it means going back to childhood, that's O.K. It was probably the last time most of us felt secure. ROBERT E. MILLER II Saugatuck, Mich.

OCCUPATIONAL HAZARDS

Your NOTEBOOK item "Gaza: Echoes Of Iraq" described the bombing of a U.S. embassy convoy in Gaza, the first time Americans have been fatally targeted by Palestinians inside the occupied territories [Oct. 27]. How about a story headlined "Iraq: Echoes of Gaza"? Thanks to the Bush Administration, the U.S. has acquired its own West Bank and Gaza. THOMAS PLAZIBAT Tucson, Ariz.

FUNDING FRACAS

Joe Klein's column on the debate over the Administration's request for $87 billion to maintain the occupation and begin rebuilding Iraq is an example of how the Republicans have framed the issue [Oct. 27]. Either you backed the entire $87 billion, or you voted against supporting our troops. That's nonsense. The onus should have been put on the Administration to provide accountability and allow Congress to do its job of appropriating money in chunks smaller than $87 billion. JACQUELINE BUEHRING Naperville, Ill.

It seems both unfair and nonsensical for Klein to lambaste Democrats--Wesley Clark in particular--for not swallowing hook, line and sinker the Bush Administration's request for $87 billion. Klein himself suggests that the reasons for the invasion of Iraq were, "at the very least, oversold" and that "the post-Saddam period has been marked by ... arrogance and incompetence." JEFFREY LOHN New York City

DETERMINED RESISTANCE

Thank you for your insightful report on the sophisticated and organized enemy attacks on U.S. troops [Oct. 27]. Why was it so hard for the Bush Administration and Congress to predict that some Iraqis would continue to fight us after the downfall of Saddam? If a coalition of countries were to successfully invade the U.S. for purposes of regime change, our citizens would employ tactics of terrorism against the occupying forces and attempt to destabilize the new government. The resistance would continue long after our defending forces had been defeated. The war in Iraq will go on until we acknowledge our arrogance and pull the invading troops out. MICHAEL KNOX Temple Terrace, Fla.

You presented a shortsighted view of the situation in Iraq. Of course coalition troops are endangered, and we are saddened by the loss of soldiers, but what happened to the vision of a free world? Who is going to fight for it if the U.S. doesn't? Should we pay the price now or wait until a massive terrorist attack exacts a greater toll? Have we not learned the lessons of our tolerance for evil ideologies such as communism and Nazism? Let us learn from history and prevent disaster rather than try to deal with it after it has been brought upon us. KOUROSH AZADI Calabasas, Calif.

When will Western journalists apply the same moral standards to Iraqis that they do to Western soldiers in Iraq? Although coalition soldiers who search through private houses and women's closets may be culturally insensitive, theirs is not a moral crime that justifies cold-blooded execution. It may even be a good way of finding hidden arms and ensuring the safety of soldiers and their Iraqi colleagues. Some Western observers seem to imply that violence is the sole means of expression of a downtrodden and repressed people, but those who launch attacks in Iraq are able to do so in part because they are no longer downtrodden by a repressive regime. DANIEL FISHER Montpellier, France

TOMB RAIDERS

Your story "Spirited Away" described how art thieves are stripping Asia's cultural sites of valuable artwork and smuggling it abroad for sale [Oct. 27]. A nation's cultural heritage represents its glory and growth. Looking at the art of the past helps us to take a break from the harshness of present-day life and travel back in time. Anyone who tries to downplay the theft or destruction of cultural artifacts is seriously misguided. Those who are involved in this heinous business must be severely punished. ARVIND K. PANDEY Allahabad, India

IRANIAN NOBELIST

The morning Iranian human-rights activist Shirin Ebadi won the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize [Oct. 20], the Iranian government greeted her award with conspicuous silence. Big mistake. Many Iranians surely read about it right away on the Internet and were surprised that Ebadi wasn't mentioned on Iranian TV until hours had passed. Now they know for sure that their religious leadership withholds things from them and doesn't always tell them the truth. MERCEDES PEREZ Lima

Ebadi said there is "absolutely nothing incompatible or contradictory about Islam, democracy and political freedom." The people in the West have heard these wise words and will, I hope, remember them. Understanding them is a big step toward peaceful coexistence between Islam and Christianity. AHMED MAHMOUD NAMFULLAH Faisalabad, Pakistan

MAHATHIR MISSES THE TARGET

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's anti-Semitic comments deserve scrutiny [Oct. 27]. He said, "Today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them." If his comments weren't so pathetic, we should thank Mahathir for revealing precisely the mentality of the Islamic leaders he was addressing. Even if the Prime Minister's assertions were true, they largely missed the point. If so many Jews were in influential positions, it would show the ability of Jewish communities to adapt to their environment and grasp what modernity is about. Constrained by a difficult history, Jews have had little choice but to find ways to integrate into host societies. Just as anti-Semites in Europe did in the past, Mahathir is mistaking a consequence for a cause. He misses the real target, the modern world in which Muslim society has been marginalized. Modernity wasn't created by the Jews. As Mahathir said, the Muslim world will yield far more global influence if it fights terrorism and opens up its economies. DAVID GINEDAPE Brussels