I think we are maybe discussing slightly different things: you're talking about Koreans in Korea, whereas I had in mind Asians and more specifically Koreans in the western world where they and their children frequently excel relative to native people who work less hard. This is a discussion about the SAT and not the 수능 exam after all.
User intertextuality proposed that maybe the SAT should be adjusted so it "doesn't reward excruciating studying and working systems". My point is that firstly, many people find studying to a deadline to be excruciating so let's dispense with the dramatic adjectives, and secondly, what kind of replacement for the SAT scheme would not reward hard work and study? Would it even be an exam at all? In any conceivable testing regime people who study and work harder to succeed will, on average, do better. That seems fundamental. Without changing it so much it's not an exam anymore, Koreans will seem to have a cultural advantage over other less hard-working cultures and why should they not? In America they are not forced to work crazy hours, by law or the economy or culture or anything else.
It's entirely possible for the SAT to remain exactly as it is, in a way that rewards study, without implying a Korea-style deathmarch cultural ethic.
There's a difference in normal studying for a deadline (which just sucks) versus studying all day, every day, to the extent that Korean-Koreans do. I have no idea about American-Koreans. Both countries have big standardized tests (SAT, 수능) but the SAT is nowhere near as important as the 수능.
I do think standardized testing is fundamentally broken, but for mass-grading of people there's no other real alternative I suppose. However, I don't think the SAT's job should also be trying to account for systemic issues in America and life.
Instead, college admission boards should look at background as well as SAT scores. I believe they do this already, but SAT scores should be even less emphasized. Beyond a very minimum level I don't think it's a really good indicator of a person at all.
User intertextuality proposed that maybe the SAT should be adjusted so it "doesn't reward excruciating studying and working systems". My point is that firstly, many people find studying to a deadline to be excruciating so let's dispense with the dramatic adjectives, and secondly, what kind of replacement for the SAT scheme would not reward hard work and study? Would it even be an exam at all? In any conceivable testing regime people who study and work harder to succeed will, on average, do better. That seems fundamental. Without changing it so much it's not an exam anymore, Koreans will seem to have a cultural advantage over other less hard-working cultures and why should they not? In America they are not forced to work crazy hours, by law or the economy or culture or anything else.
It's entirely possible for the SAT to remain exactly as it is, in a way that rewards study, without implying a Korea-style deathmarch cultural ethic.