It's a shame that you work for an education startup and you don't even bother reading the articles you are posting.
The article clearly states, that the standardized tests made things more egalitarian.
If you truly are interested in the truth and not merely trying to profit on persecuting people on ideological grounds, perhaps you might want to point to where the flaws in the tests lie, something the article fails to mention.
They forgot to mention that the paper says IQ cutoffs were 130 for non-disadvantaged students vs 115 for poor/minority.
The paper then goes on to say, with lower ovjective standards, the groups pass the subjective bar at equal rates.
The subjective bar being applied by a system so motivated to achieve proportional representation they altered cutoffs.
The results would not be reliable immediately, but over time such a system would simultaneously refocus the billions spent on standardized testing into more productive educational endeavors while also supporting educational improvement. As a high school level teacher, standardized testing data is useless for improving my instruction and improving student outcomes. We should close the gap between these redundant assessment regimes, reduce the negative impacts associated with how we administer standardized assessments, and save school districts money.
I don't see changing a test to be a solution. If the problem is not having well equipped parents and network, then the solution has to attack that issue. Which of course is very difficult and spans over decades as it would take generations to change.
However, don't make the test expensive. Basically, make it economically equal to as great a degree as possible. Some will still be disadvantaged of course, but I think at some point that's reality, the fact is everyone is not equal. If everyone is treated equal though, then at least those with value can rise themselves to the top regardless of other circumstance.