By Katy Nguyen & Karen Phan
University of California (UC) regents unanimously voted Thursday to drop the SAT and ACT exam requirements for in-state undergraduate admissions.
“I think this is an incredible step in the right direction toward aligning our admissions policy with the broad-based values of the University,” UC Board of Regents Chair John A. Pérez said before the vote. “I see our role as fiduciaries and stewards of the public good and this proposal before us is an incredible step in the right direction.”
The plan to drop standardized test scores spans over five years and was proposed by UC President Janet Napolitano. Under her five-year plan, UC will be test-optional for the first two years, which are the fall 2021 and 2022 admissions cycle, and test-blind for years three and four, 2023 and 2024.
In year five, UC will roll out its own standardized assessment for its 10-campus system. If no admissions assessment is created by fall 2025, UC will permanently eliminate the SAT and ACT admissions requirement, which is just one out of 14 factors in its comprehensive admissions process.
Out-of-state and international applicants will still be required to submit their SAT and ACT scores. Unlike Californian high school students, nonresident students do not take high school courses that are pre-approved by UC, so standardized testing is needed to ensure fairness in the admissions process.
Napolitano asked that beginning in 2025, the Academic Senate, which sets admission standards, works with UC administrators to determine how to modify admissions for nonresident students, which may include extending the new UC-specific admissions assessment.
UC’s elimination of SAT and ACT test requirements has been met with mixed reactions.
“The SAT, while heavily flawed, provides a way for all students to be judged on an equal playing field,” junior Peter Sears, who already took the SAT, said. “While test prep services do exist, anyone can study and test well. Extracurriculars are less accessible to low-income families, and grades are extremely different based on schools.”
Others, such as junior Shayla Pham, approve of UC’s decision.
“I like that the UC regents have chosen to eliminate SAT and ACT requirements for the foreseeable future,“ Pham said. “Ultimately, the SAT and ACT have become [a] large source of stress for students, and for some their chance of admission weighs too heavily on a test that not everyone has equal access to prepare for.”
Some also predict it is unlikely that UC will be able to create a new standardized test, such as Robert Schaeffer, interim director of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, an organization that has long fought against the SAT and ACT.
“It appears very unlikely that they will be able to design an instrument that is more accurate and fairer than relying on applicants’ high school records,” Schaeffer said. “If a new test somehow meets those goals promoters would face massive adoption barriers, including persuading UC and the rest of the admissions world that a third test is truly needed or useful.”
UC’s decision to drop the SAT and ACT exam requirements comes during a time of mounting pressure and increasing criticism of the exams. Critics question the validity of the exams and argue that they discriminate against disadvantaged students, such as low-income black and Hispanic students and those with no access to expensive test preparation classes.
“The test is a proxy for privilege,” Vice-Chair Regent Cecilia Estolano said. “It’s time, it has been studied to death.”
ACT Inc. and College Board, which owns the SAT, claim that the exams are unbiased and any inequities are a result of already existing flaws in the education system, not a product of the exams themselves.
Marten Roorda, ACT chief executive officer, wrote a letter to the UC Board of Regents on May 18, criticizing Napolitano’s proposal.
“These new recommendations will further the uncertainty and anxiety of students and their families at a time when they need all the reassurances and resources we can provide,” he wrote. “The sweeping proposal will also strain admissions offices, state budget and the broader education system, creating more questions and concerns about fairness, equity.”
In response to Roorda’s letter, UC Regent Eloy Ortiz Oakley said that “it’s unfortunate that [Roorda] and the ACT leadership would try to deflect any responsibility for the impact of testing on students onto UC.”
“It’s clear that it’s had a deleterious effect on low-income students and students of color,” Oakley said.
Like ACT Inc., College Board disagreed with UC’s decision and said that a third exam would increase the burden on students who choose to apply to UC’s as well as other colleges and universities that may still require SAT and ACT exam scores.
“Having to take multiple tests will likely cause many of these students to limit their college options much earlier in the college search process,” College Board said.
On the other hand, Napolitano said that the SAT and ACT do not suit the needs of Californian students.
“Generally the right test is better than no test,” she said during the debate prior to the vote. “But a flawed test should not continue to be required.”
Napolitano’s five-year plan is a compromise between standardized test supporters and opponents of the SAT and ACT, as it drops the exam requirements but allows UC to develop its own standardized exam.
“The Senate is pleased that the president’s recommendations are in line with the spirit of our recommendations,” said Kum-Kum Bhavani, chair of the Academic Senate. “We look forward to working with the university to develop a new content-based test.”
UC’s action could have an enormous impact on the future of standardized testing nation-wide because it is one of the largest university systems in the nation and also the largest market for the SAT and ACT. Last year, four-fifths of UC’s 172,000 freshmen applicants took the SAT.
The elimination of SAT and ACT score requirements is “the beginning of the end” for the SAT, said Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis, an ex officio regent. “We really are the first body to tackle this head-on and say enough is enough.”
