This story is syndicated from The Communicator, the newspaper of Community High School in Ann Arbor, MI. The original version of the story ran here.
Sitting down in a chair, opening the computer and navigating to the Common App portal is all a part of the undeniably stressful process of applying to college. GPA, standardized testing scores and extracurricular activities that reflect a student’s capabilities both inside and outside of the classroom are all factors throughout the selection process — but as part of anti-test, pandemic-era push, many colleges in recent years implemented test-optional policies. It seemed as though students could finally apply to their dream schools without worrying about their test scores.
Although test-optional policies seem appealing, statistics tell a different story. According to College Vine, a recruiting network for high school students, even students who submitted test scores below the 25th percentile are accepted at a rate 1.25 times higher than students who did not. The disparity hints thatthat colleges still consider test scores to be a major factor during the application process, optional or not.
In 2022, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced they’d be reversing their test-optional policy. Other high-profile schools soon followed, including Yale and Brown. This year, Dartmouth announced that beginning with the class of 2029, its undergraduate applicants too will again be required to submiteither SAT or ACT scores. While no one school or even several can represent accurately all colleges across the USA, the sampling isa strong indicator of how U.S. colleges are starting to seriously reconsider the significance of test scores in students’ applications.
Among the factors considered when colleges started implementing test-optional policies in the first place was the inherent bias of standardized tests, as students with more resources were able to artifically boost their scores by hiring tutors, attending preparatory lessons or accessing test preparation materials to practice.
“SAT at that time was no longer a fair measure of student success,” said Kelly Maveal, a CHS counselor. “So they had no choice but to do away with it.”
For students who are not naturally gifted test-takers, the recent test-optional policies have also provided an alternative way of demonstrating academic ability, whether that is exhausting the curriculum at their schools, taking a variety of classes or showing passion. Investing time and energy into what they are truly passionate about is a reflection of academic interests, persistence and the ability to execute tasks. The policies puts more weight on other aspects of each student’s experience and provides hope for students who may not be confident test-takers.
“Colleges are looking into holistic measures of students’ merit,” Maveal said. “If a student is winning awards, a leader in clubs and activities, taking college classes, doing well in them, and having that strong letter of recommendation, it’s to their benefit to apply test-optional.”
Like the biased test system reformers sought to overhaul, though, the college application process in the USA remains intrinsically biased and unfair for many students.
The undergraduate pool has become increasingly crowded and competitive, with more students applying but without test scores. In a standardized test like the SAT, students are compared with test-takers across the nation and even the entire world. Without test scores, GPA becomes the primary, quantitative indicator of a student’s academic ability.
“Transcripts aren’t objective,” Maveal said. “It’s really hard to compare students. Many students get a 4.0 or 3.9, and it’s like, ‘gosh, what is the school supposed to do compared to students who have near-perfect scores?’ ”
GPA varies from school to school, as courses are not standardized. It is even harder to compare students from different states.
“An ‘A’ in Ann Arbor is not the same as an ‘A’ in California or Florida,” Maveal said. “Even within cities with neighboring school districts, it doesn’t really mean anything. It was harder to choose to compare students and choose students. It was a shot in the dark, and they were making ill-informed decisions on their incoming class.”
