I would sure hope so. As the parent of a high school senior the paranoia around these tests is ridiculous. The test, in and of itself, is not the issue. There are dozens of classes, workshops, tutors, seminars all available at a low (not really) price to help you guarantee admission to the school of your dreams. The amount of pressure associated with this is silly compared to my generation, a vast 25 years ago. Some of these kids are taking the tests 4 or more times! Oh well, when I was their age we still had music, art and PE in school. Now get off my lawn!
Friend teaches art at an exclusive school in the Palisades. They have a fuckin' laser cutter. And a 3d printer. And an extruder. And a lathe. And a mill. So I'm not sure what "shop class" looks like but when art class uses .stl files I think the distinction blends. Granted - "exclusive school in the Palisades." But I'll bet there are still hammers in the world.
I took a shop class in high school (albeit it was only for two weeks because I found out the sawdust really messed with my allergies). In my school especially in the advanced shop classes you made some serious stuff. I remember the teacher telling us about a student who made like a small furniture set and sold it for like 3 or 4 grand.
Good news about GWU, but I highly doubt that many US schools will completely turn away from SATs/ACTs. Even GWU has only gone 'test-optional', so I would bet that most of the top candidates will still be taking those tests and submitting their scores to GWU. I definitely don't envy the job of the college admissions officer. It must be very difficult to make cuts between hundreds of almost-identical applications while also trying to fish out applications of exceptional students who (for whatever reason) have weak application packages. In an ideal world it might be possible to interview all of the candidates, although that opens up other potential biases. At the end of the day, the SAT/ACT is just another way to try to distinguish between slightly worse and slightly better candidates, although, as the article points out, it isn't actually particularly good at doing so. One of the other issues with the SAT/ACT is that it furthers gaps between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots' when it comes to higher education. Sure, everyone writes the same test, regardless of their parents' socio-economic standing. But whether or not a student gets prep books, group (or private) tutoring, gets to retake the test (at about $50 a go, iirc) to improve their score etc. is all highly dependent on their parents' expectations and financial resources.
Wasn't the SAT made easier recently? Anyway, I really don't know much about the statistics behind SAT/ACT and success in college. I mean I did pretty average and I'm doing a lot better in college. I know people who had fantastic SAT/ACT/GPA who have dropped out, or who have an atrocious GPA. That is really all anecdotal evidence though. I think the test is an interesting tool to evaluate students, but I don't think it should ever serve as a negative for a student.