As of 2020, nearly every top university in the United States has gone test optional: the submission of SAT scores is not required in the admissions process.
But that looks like it’s going to change. As of the writing of this article, many top universities, including Cornell and Harvard, have doubled back on their test optional policies, requiring that applicants submit their standardized test scores.
Why were SAT submissions axed in the first place? More importantly, what changed to cause the most competitive universities in America to come back to them?
SAT score submissions first became optional in 2020, following the onset of the coronavirus pandemic. Many students could no longer access testing centers safely, so, for the class of 2020 and the class of 2021, the SAT became unrealistic given global circumstances. The SAT was not mandated by schools immediately after the pandemic, mainly due to concerning data that was found in a research study conducted by Harvard University, which showed that SAT score was heavily tied to socioeconomic status, and an imperfect indicator of GPA.
However, as those familiar with data science know, correlation does not necessitate causation. In other words, just because wealthier people do better on the SAT, it is not necessarily their wealth that causes this. Wealthier people typically live in areas that have higher quality of education, which contributes to their better test scores. So, despite its correlation with socioeconomic status, SAT score still remains as an indicator of past educational experience.
In general, colleges stuck with their test optional policy despite the study failing to prove why the SAT is not necessarily effective. However, in January 2024, another study changed everything. Brown University conducted a study which showed that GPA was a far less accurate indicator of future academic success than the SAT was. This further proves the point that the SAT has remained a quality metric that schools can use for admissions.
However, many still believe that the SAT stacks the admissions process against the less economically fortunate. They claim that because wealthier people can afford tutoring, they have a much better chance at getting a higher score. While this is true, it needs to be put in perspective with the other aspects of a college application, namely one critical area: the extracurriculars section.
Extracurricular activities are undeniably more favorable for the wealthier. Those that are less economically fortunate often have a smaller amount of extracurricular opportunities in their area, and they often have other responsibilities (such as family care or work), that inhibits them from spending a great amount of time on other, more attractive extracurriculars.
On the other side, wealthier families often deliberately pick extracurricular activities that are attractive to colleges. There are even some private high schools, dubbed “feeder schools” because of their proclivity to send students to the ivy league, that specialize in expensive sports like fencing or rowing so that their students will have a unique perspective and skill that are extremely attractive to top colleges.
Now, let’s reconsider the SAT, an exam where for a little over two hours, all students are put on a level playing field. Sure, some students have prepared for the exam more than others, but the students’ performance alone will determine how they do on the exam, not their wealth or privilege, but sheer scholastic aptitude.
This is the beauty of the SAT. Because no matter how poor someone is, if they are smart and hardworking, they have the opportunity to have a better college application than some of the wealthiest kids on Earth.
With more and more colleges re-instituting SAT requirements for applications, amidst the gnashing of teeth and the test day nerves, students can rest easy knowing that everyone is being given a fair shake, no matter if they like it or not.
