Arguments against competency testing surface continually, and classic counter-arguments reoccur. Nevertheless, minimum competency testing and other accountability efforts have much public support. Those claiming that the tests are not relevant or do not have predictive validity, also say they are coachable and biased. Answers are given to these arguments; along with three situations of testing "wronged students": (1) by limiting a student's opportunities; (2) by risking psychological health; (3) by invading privacy and violating confidentiality. Besides educational programs and teachers being harmed, there is claim that the tests, being conceived by the upper middle class are promoting elitist values. These attacks are presented, the objections outlined, legitimate failings corrected and forceful, logical arguments presented in favor of testing. The document grants that access to the sources of relevant skill and information is unequal. However, in the long run, society will benefit not by giving special treatment to all members of special groups without regard to the opportunities that specific individuals in the group have had, not by offering preferrential treatment on the basis of some general inherited characteristic, but by equalizing the opportunities for all people. (Author/CE)