The University of California system is reviewing its ban on SAT and ACT tests after faculty raised alarm about incoming students’ math preparation, and a faculty letter argued testing is essential to equity. Regents could decide to require standardized exams again for the 2028 admissions cycle, joining other top universities reassessing test-optional policies. This debate pits concerns about access and “woke” admissions practices against practical classroom readiness in STEM fields.
Faculty across the UC system signed a public letter saying many students arrive unprepared for college-level work, forcing professors to reteach basics rather than build on them. Those professors say this isn’t about shutting doors; it’s about making sure students who want to pursue STEM have the tools to succeed when they get to campus. The conversation nudged the UC administration to announce a formal review of the testing policy, which could lead to reinstating SAT or ACT expectations.
https://x.com/interesting_aIl/status/2065170682254696945
The faculty argument centers on measurable preparation gaps, not gatekeeping. They insist it is better to identify weaknesses before students enter demanding programs than to let those gaps fester in STEM classrooms. From this perspective, standardized tests are diagnostic: a snapshot of readiness that can guide placement, advising, and early remediation rather than a blunt instrument of exclusion.
Critics will say reinstating tests worsens inequality, and that point deserves a fair airing. Yet faculty who pushed for review framed the issue differently, noting that pushing unprepared students into higher-level courses actually harms their prospects and the quality of instruction for everyone. The claim is that failing to measure what students know simply moves obstacles into the classroom where they are harder to address.
The SAT/ACT mathematics requirement is not an obstacle to equity; rather, it is a prerequisite for it. Failing to measure preparation gaps does not remove barriers; it moves them into the classroom, where they become harder to overcome.
Other selective universities have already revisited test-optional policies and shifted course, including institutions that once championed dropping SAT and ACT requirements as a progressive step. Those schools concluded that knowing incoming students’ academic baseline helps tailor support and protects students in demanding majors from avoidable failure. UC joining that trend would be a significant signal about the limits of test-optional reforms at elite public institutions.
Any policy change would not take effect overnight; the soonest possible impact is the 2028 admissions cycle, which gives campuses time to design fair, targeted ways to use test information. Advocates for reinstatement emphasize that standardized tests should be one of multiple measures, used to place students where they can thrive and to allocate resources for remediation. Practical steps could include test-informed placement into bridge programs and targeted tutoring before students start major coursework.
There’s also a political layer to this debate. Some see the move as a corrective to campus trends that prioritize identity-based admissions over academic preparedness. From a conservative viewpoint, restoring tests is about accountability and preparing students for rigorous careers, not shutting anyone out. Faculty who raised the alarm are positioning themselves as defenders of both standards and student opportunity.
Opponents will worry that returning to tests could penalize students from under-resourced schools, but faculty proponents counter that ignoring preparation does those students a disservice. The central claim is that genuine equity requires assessing where students start so institutions can help them get where they want to go. Without that baseline, support systems risk being misdirected or insufficient.
Whatever the Board of Regents decides, the debate exposes a tension between ideals and outcomes in higher education policy. Universities must balance commitments to access with the responsibility to ensure students can succeed in chosen programs, especially in STEM fields where gaps in math skills quickly compound. The UC review will be watched closely as a test case for whether large public systems recalibrate expectations to better serve students and faculty alike.
— Jim Polk 🇺🇸 (@JimPolk)
Many faculty express fatigue over repeatedly compensating for K-12 shortcomings, and that sentiment helped spur this review. If the UC system opts to reinstate standardized testing, it will join a growing list of institutions that decided measuring incoming preparation matters more than adhering to a purely test-optional ideal. The coming months should clarify whether the Regents prioritize measurable readiness as part of a broader strategy to improve outcomes.
Add comment