A growing consortium of University of California (U.C.) educators is imploring the state system to consider basic testing standards for STEM applicants. As of Thursday, more than 1,400 U.C. faculty members have signed onto a letter calling for the reinstatement of the SAT/ACT mathematics requirement for STEM majors, citing a dramatic drop in math proficiency.
The letter, written by four U.C. Berkeley math professors and a law professor, claims that U.C. STEM professors now “observe preparation gaps so severe that instructors must reteach middle-school mathematics while simultaneously teaching the material students need for sciences, engineering, economics, and other quantitatively demanding fields.”
U.C. schools eliminated their standardized test requirement in 2020 in the name of advancing equity. According to U.C. policy, the system “no longer considers SAT or ACT test scores when making admissions decisions or awarding scholarships.” Students can, however, use test scores to meet minimum subject requirements, but “students must first submit the application without scores.”
On an FAQ page, the open letter clarifies that the math SAT or ACT score “should not automatically admit or reject anyone,” and it should be “one piece of evidence” used when evaluating applications. The scores should be used as a “readiness check, not as a mechanical ranking tool.”
In an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal on Monday, two of the letter’s authors, professors Svetlana Jitomirskaya and Zvezdelina Stankova, emphasized the need to bring back standardized testing.
“The nonstandardized records we do require from applicants are increasingly inaccurate,” they wrote. “High-school grade inflation has rendered transcripts nearly meaningless.”
They also noted that the SAT can serve as a “nationally normed check on readiness” in an “era of artificial-intelligence-confected essays.”
In a separate letter published by the Journal, the U.C.’s Academic Senate Chairman Ahmet Palazoglu rightfully pointed out that “college readiness is about far more than admissions standards.” Palazoglu detailed how U.C. has collaborated with K-12 leaders to “strengthen student preparation” and “support student success.”
Bringing back standardized tests would not fully solve the problem of school readiness. But schools should not be dissuaded from requiring baseline standards for students out of fear of being perceived as inequitable. As Reason has pointed out, ample evidence contradicts the idea that test-free or test-optional policies increase inequality.
“Standardized test scores, while imperfect, are the closest to an objective measure colleges have for making admissions decisions—one that isolates academic achievement from expensive extracurriculars and tutor-polished essays,” wrote Emma Camp for Reason in 2024.
It appears that the University of California is not the only higher ed institution now realizing this. Just last week, Yale joined several elite schools in reversing test-optional policies. In 2024, the school required students to submit SAT, ACT, International Baccalaureate, or Advanced Placement exams, according to The Wall Street Journal. Now, Yale will require students to submit either SAT or ACT scores in the next admissions cycle.
“SAT and ACT scores are strong predictors of a student’s future Yale academic performance,” said Yale College Dean Pericles Lewis, who served as the chair of the school’s Presidential Council on Yale College Admissions. “When considered thoughtfully as part of a whole person review, they can help identify well-prepared candidates, especially those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds.”
The admissions process will never be perfect, and schools may still debate how much SAT and ACT scores should be weighted against other factors like essays and grades. Asking students to submit test scores so schools can evaluate students’ baseline readiness should not be controversial; professors should be able to instruct at a university level without having to cater to those unprepared for college. Any university system, especially one that depends on public funding, would best serve its students and professors by committing to academic rigor, not revisiting the fundamentals.
