The College Board introduced the digital SAT in an attempt to balance convenience and equality. Instead of three hours, the test is now two. Everyone has access to a Desmos graphing calculator for the entire math portion. However, challenges have arisen. From logistical concerns to technical glitches and fairness debates, the new format has received mixed opinions from test-takers.
Logistical challenges and limited access
For senior Grace Borden, the process of registering and taking the SAT felt unnecessarily complex. “I had missed the sign-ups every single time,” she explained. She was left with one final opportunity to take the test.
After arriving at Olympia High School early, Borden was shocked by the number of out-of-town students: “There were parents camping out in the parking lot.” She remembered an unexpected interaction where two students from the same high school in Vancouver recognized each other.
Borden questioned the fairness of this system. Her brother had to travel to southern Washington for an available seat while others took local spots. She suggested a registration overhaul to better accommodate first-time test-takers: “I think priority should be given to people who haven’t taken it yet at the schools they go to.”
Junior Charles Gong echoed concerns about the organizational aspects of the SAT, describing it as a mix of preparedness and unpredictability. “It felt like stepping into a chess tournament where you think you’re ready, but there’s always that lingering uncertainty,” he stated. Despite minor nerves, a supportive atmosphere made his day more manageable.
Preparation differences and technical barriers
The digital format brought its own share of hurdles for students less familiar with the technology. Borden felt well-prepared after practicing on the Bluebook app, but not everyone was. “There was a person who showed up and didn’t have Bluebook on their computer. There were people in my room who couldn’t get onto our Wi-Fi because it’s so locked down. I think that having it be online does create some barriers to people taking it,” she observed.
Gong ran into what every student and staff dreaded: a technical problem, albeit a minor one. His Bluebook app failed to configure correctly. “Thankfully, they switched it out for a loaner Chromebook, and I was able to get it back,” he recalled. Gong also critiqued the test’s layout, describing it as “cramped and clunky.”
Fairness
Opinions on the test’s fairness varied. Senior Zoë Smitherman and Borden praised the inclusion of the Desmos calculator. They felt it leveled the playing field.
“Before, someone might have a four-function calculator while another person has a TI-Nspire. And those two are both allowed, but if they know how, the person with the TI-Nspire can have the test do a lot of things for them. Now, everybody has access to the same calculator that does the same things, so that part is more equitable,” Smitherman illustrated.
However, the adaptive module system, which adjusts question difficulty based on performance, sparked frustration and questions. Gong described it as “a slap in the face” for high-performing students. He elaborated: “If you do well, congrats — here’s a harder test, while others skate through with an easier version.”
The test content also drew mixed reviews. Borden found the math section manageable because of the Desmos calculator. “If Desmos wasn’t on that test, I would’ve failed the math section,” she commented.
On the other hand, Borden and Gong found some instructions overly complex. While Borden thought some English questions were too easy, others were so dense and convoluted she had to read “three times to make sure [she] understood them.” Gong emphasized, “The English section was brutal. The repetitiveness felt like it was sapping my will to stay awake.”
Suggestions for improvement
All three students were quick to offer recommendations for improving the SAT experience. Gong proposed a “Ready to Start?” prompt to give students more control over their timing, as well as a rework of the distracting pop-up notifications that appeared during the test. “Who thought forcing a notification we had to close manually as the timer is ticking was a good idea?” he asked.
Borden specified the need for a fairer registration system, arguing that local students should be prioritized over repeat test-takers from distant areas. While the shorter test length and standardized calculator were steps forward, she thought question design and instructions could be improved.
Mixed opinions
The digital SAT has inevitably changed the standardized testing world. It’s offered greater accessibility through tools like Desmos but has also introduced new challenges regarding technology and fairness. Many students’ experienced surprises and frustrations.
As Borden summarized, “The SAT has gotten better, but I feel like the questions need to be designed better.” With student feedback like this, the SAT’s digital future holds the potential to become a more equitable and efficient assessment — if these concerns are addressed.
