Last week, New York City’s Specialized High School Admissions Test (SHSAT) took place—a single exam with the power to determine entry into the city’s most prestigious high schools. For years, this test has sparked fierce debate: is it an equalizer, giving all students a shot at academic excellence, or a gate that keeps out minority students and prevents equity? With Black and Latino students making up 68% of NYC’s public school population but only about 10% of those admitted to specialized high schools, many see the SHSAT as a symbol of the system’s failures.
Critics argue that the SHSAT favors wealthy students who can afford test preperation, leaving others at a disadvantage. To them, it’s a wall, not a gate—a barrier that shuts out talented students who don’t have the resources to prepare. Yet, a closer look complicates this view: over half of the students who qualify through the SHSAT come from low-income backgrounds, with many eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, showing that this isn’t really a discussion about wealth.
At its core, this debate is about representation. The SHSAT’s opponents point to the lack of Black and Hispanic students at specialized high schools as evidence that the admissions process is flawed. For them, the test serves as a barrier that excludes these groups from schools that should reflect the city’s diversity. However, these schools are deeply diverse in other ways, filled with students from immigrant families across Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Africa. Many are first- or second-generation immigrants, often from low-income households, who view education as their path to a better life. Their diversity isn’t fully captured by racial statistics but by the range of languages, cultures, and life experiences they bring into the schools.
These specialized high schools weren’t created to match demographic numbers; they were designed to foster academic excellence through a merit-based system that would give hardworking students a path to success. As one Stuyvesant graduate noted, “A colorblind, meritocratic admissions system is not only perfectly consistent with liberal ideals, but also serves as a crucial engine of economic mobility.” For many immigrant families, the SHSAT is exactly that—a fair chance for their children to succeed, based on academic readiness rather than connections or wealth.1
But for some, like former Mayor Bill de Blasio, the focus remains on a specific kind of equity. His administration aimed to reduce Asian representation at New York’s specialized high schools, despite the fact that many Asian students come from low-income, immigrant backgrounds. His then-Deputy Chancellor, Milady Baez, reportedly remarked, “I walked into Stuyvesant HS, and I thought I was in Chinatown!” For these families, the SHSAT isn’t just a test—it’s a fair shot at success through hard work and academic achievement. Policies that reduce their representation feel less like equity and more like penalizing them for playing by the rules and winning.
The reality is that many SHSAT-qualified students come from modest means, with parents who sacrifice financially and personally to prepare their children. In neighborhoods across the city, community-based tutoring programs and local mentors help students who can’t afford private test prep. For these families, the SHSAT is an assurance that their hard work can pay off, that success can be earned. The fear is that without the SHSAT, admissions would turn subjective, favoring wealthier students who can polish their essays, stack up extracurriculars, and secure glowing recommendations. These factors are far easier for the wealthy to exploit than a test.
In recent years, programs like Discovery have created a workaround to the SHSAT. Originally designed to admit a small number of students who narrowly missed the cutoff, former Mayor Bill de Blasio expanded Discovery to reserve up to 20% of seats at certain schools. While this has increased diversity, data shows that Discovery admits often score a full letter grade lower than SHSAT admits on Regents exams. This gap not only affects classroom dynamics but also limits course offerings, as resources shift to support students with less academic preparation.
Some say that with the right resources, more students would thrive in specialized high schools. Amir Davis, a Black graduate of Brooklyn Tech who mentors students preparing for the SHSAT, saw firsthand that the issue isn’t always about potential; it’s often about preparation. Through a tutoring program he co-founded in Southeast Queens, Davis noticed that many students lacked basic skills, not because they weren’t capable but because they weren’t given the foundational tools in their public schools. “Many did not have simple multiplication and division skills,” he observed, pointing to systemic gaps that leave students unprepared before they even take the SHSAT.
This brings us to a fundamental question: what is the purpose of specialized high schools? Schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science were established to nurture academic excellence, to push students ready for advanced coursework to excel. Adjusting admissions in the name of diversity risks compromising the high standards that define these schools and the very mission they were created to serve.
Additionally, by focusing on the SHSAT, we miss the larger issue: public school performance gaps that leave many students unprepared by high school. Removing the test won’t fix these deeper problems; it simply shifts the focus away from them. Instead of blaming the SHSAT, we should work to strengthen early education so all students have a fair chance to succeed when it counts.
The SHSAT is more than a test—it’s a symbol of opportunity for families who believe that hard work should be rewarded. The conversation about specialized high schools shouldn’t be about finding ways around merit but about ensuring that every student receives the preparation they need to meet these academic challenges head-on.
- Interestingly, one of the best articles on the topic was written by Sheluyang Peng, an Asian writer, and published in Tablet, a magazine with a traditionally Jewish focus. Titled The Last Holdouts of American Meritocracy, the article dives deep into the SHSAT debate and its implications for immigrant communities. This publication makes sense, as Tablet often explores themes of identity, culture, and meritocracy—values that resonate strongly with both Jewish and Asian communities, who share a history of relying on merit-based education as a pathway to social and economic mobility. ↩︎
You must be logged in to post a comment.