ACT and SAT each have their own parts of the country. The GRE has its lock on graduate admissions. And so, one could blame the companies, but really, economically, they have no incentive to change things very much because they're getting the business.

The quote by Robert Sternberg critiques the role of standardized tests like the ACT, SAT, and GRE in the educational system, particularly in college and graduate admissions. Sternberg points out that each of these tests dominates specific areas of education and admissions, with the ACT and SAT primarily influencing undergraduate admissions, and the GRE being a key factor in graduate admissions. He suggests that these tests have become entrenched in the admissions process and that the companies behind them benefit financially from their continued use.

Sternberg argues that the companies responsible for creating and administering these tests have little economic incentive to change the system, as they are making significant profits from the widespread reliance on these exams. This critique highlights the potential for these companies to prioritize their financial interests over the evolving needs of students and educational institutions. The quote suggests that the standardized testing industry is inherently resistant to change, as the demand for these exams ensures continued business and revenue.

The origin of this quote stems from Sternberg's work as a psychologist and educator, known for his research on intelligence and education. His critique of standardized testing reflects his broader perspective on how traditional educational systems can be limiting, particularly when they rely heavily on standardized assessments that may not accurately measure a student's potential or abilities. Sternberg has often spoken out against the overreliance on such tests in the context of admissions and intelligence.

Ultimately, Sternberg’s words challenge the current educational paradigm and point to the economic forces that keep standardized testing in place. His statement emphasizes that while these exams may not fully reflect a student's abilities or readiness for higher education, the companies behind them are incentivized to maintain the status quo. This critique calls for a more thoughtful consideration of how admissions processes might evolve to better serve students and educational institutions.