Surely, you’ve heard of the SAT, a standardized test once widely used by colleges and universities to figure out whether a student applicant is up to the challenges of higher education. Or maybe you haven’t heard of them because our academic betters feared they weren’t fair to the disadvantaged, as worrisome as the whole idea of merit, and they have been disappearing from the scene.

Well, let’s say thank you to The New York Times for a front-page story saying, look, some people who know what they are doing have been running exhaustive tests that prove beyond an educated doubt that they work and work beautifully. It is simply the case that people who do well on the tests usually do well in the classroom and that those who don’t do well on the tests have far less chance of making the grades that allow for graduation.

The degree to which the tests work appears to be utterly amazing, and guess what. They are a benefit to minorities and young people from low-income families because they identify those who can get the academic job done. High school grades? Don’t count on them. To be nicer to students, too many teachers are betraying them with grades they do not deserve, which actually is misleading and not nice at all. The tests also seem to identify those who are and are not fit for elite institutions, according to the Times.

To me, these studies and their results can just maybe be a large benefit in a society that more and more seems to think objectivity is a joke and that the way to help those in the most need is to give them something they cannot handle. That can be a means of betrayal, a way of reducing someone’s efforts because of a signal that good things will happen anyway or directing someone in directions portending failure. When carried to the extreme of placing someone in a career beyond his or her abilities, it can mean damage and hurt to others inadequately served. It also fails to recognize there are meaningful undertakings requiring different kinds of talents.

I do think the Times article is on the right track in sharing observations that, as important as the SAT may be, it should not be the whole story in admissions decisions. There are all kinds of personality and character traits worth consideration even if such discernments can be difficult. Self-awareness of possible prejudice is worth careful thought. But the belittlement of merit in today’s world, seeing it as somehow fraudulent, just an excuse for unfair discrimination or of minor importance is the road to dysfunction hurting everyone.

The obvious issue is assuming merit where there is none or at least not all that much. That’s why the vast number of comparisons of SAT tests with actual higher education performances is so important. To disregard the findings is to disregard those who deserve attention, people who also have their needs in this life and who can make other lives better.

It does not follow that those who do poorly on them are inferior souls or minus a wide range of opportunities.

Jay Ambrose is an op-ed columnist for Tribune News Service.