The requirement serves as a counterweight to other components of college applications that decidedly favor wealthier students.
The requirement serves as a counterweight to other components of college applications that decidedly favor wealthier students.
H arvard University will extend its policy of not requiring applicants to submit SAT or ACT scores for the next four admissions cycles, a sign that the school may eventually elect to scrap the test requirements permanently. While opponents of using standardized-test scores in college admissions frequently make their case by appealing to equity, the practical effect of scrapping testing requirements will have the opposite effect. Harvard’s decision will hurt low- and middle-income students and result in a less well-rounded student body.
The truth is that standardized testing gives a leg up to talented non-wealthy students seeking admission to the nation’s top colleges. A team of researchers led by Raj Chetty calculated the share of students with an SAT score above 1400 (out of 1600) who attended one of the nation’s twelve most prestigious schools. Overall, 8 percent of top scorers made it to one of these super-elite colleges.
But students from families in the top 5 percent of household income were nearly twice as likely to attend a top college conditional on having an SAT score of 1400 or greater. Students in the top 1 percent were three times as likely to receive such a sought-after acceptance letter. However, students in the bottom 80 percent of family income were less likely to attend top colleges than their SAT scores would predict.
The implication is that admissions considerations other than the SAT bias admissions decisions in favor of high-income students. Higher-income students have many advantages in the college-admissions game — legacy status, violin lessons, volunteer trips to Malawi — that their lower-income peers lack. Rather than perpetuating intergenerational inequality, SAT scores serve as a counterweight to other components of college applications that decidedly favor wealthier students.
If Harvard and other top colleges admitted students purely on the basis of standardized-test scores — say, through a lottery for all applicants with an SAT score greater than 1400 — the student bodies would comprise fewer rich kids and more working-class students.
By contrast, dropping SAT requirements will increase the subjectivity of the admissions process. Harvard received over 40,000 applications in fall 2019; just 2,000 students were admitted. The sheer volume of applications necessitates the use of a screening device. If Harvard doesn’t use the SAT or ACT to filter applications, it will need to use other, less effective methods. The most likely outcome is that admissions officers will substitute their own subjective judgment, conscious or unconscious, in making those decisions.
Harvard already does this to great extent. Court documents revealed in 2018 showed that Harvard assigned its applicants a so-called personality score, rating their personal qualities on a scale of one to six. Activist groups have alleged that the “personality score” is the main channel through which the university discriminates against Asian-American students seeking admission. (Asian students received lower “personality scores” than white students, on average, despite earning higher SAT scores.)
The end of SAT requirements means more emphasis on personality scores, which are self-evidently impossible to assign objectively. No SAT requirement also probably means more preferences for legacy students, who are admitted at five times the rate of typical applicants. It’s easier for an admissions committee to accept a legacy student or the child of a major donor with mediocre academic accomplishments if applicants are not required to submit evidence of those accomplishments.
For students without legacy status or other advantages that come with wealth, SAT scores are a key tool to unlock access to elite schools. Sitting for the SAT costs only $55, with fee waivers available. The test, which assesses mathematical reasoning, reading comprehension, and vocabulary, is challenging. But it’s not impossible to ace using the $21 official study guide and a whole lot of determination. A good score on the SAT signals that the test-taker has a good work ethic and responsible study habits, which college-admissions committees supposedly value.
While Harvard will still consider SAT scores if students choose to submit them, the test-optional policy almost certainly means that SAT scores will be devalued in the admissions process. This will hurt low- and middle-income students’ prospects most of all.
It may seem silly to spill so much ink on the admissions process at a school with 6,000 undergraduates when there are 17 million college students nationwide. But the decision transcends Harvard in two critical ways. First, the turn against standardized testing extends well beyond Harvard. The University of California system, with 226,000 undergraduates, announced in May that it would stop considering the SAT and ACT entirely. Moreover, other colleges will look to Harvard, often considered the nation’s most elite school, as an example to follow.
Second, attending Harvard or another Ivy League school has a massive economic benefit. According to my own research, 53 percent of bachelor’s degrees from the nation’s twelve most elite schools increase their students’ net lifetime earnings by $1 million or more (compared with just 4 percent at all colleges). It’s likely that most of this is due to reputation — a Harvard degree looks attractive to corporate recruiters — rather than any unique academic offering at such schools. But it still matters for reasons of fairness. Talented low-income students deserve an equal shot at those lucrative careers.
The movement to end testing requirements claims to advance the cause of socioeconomic equity. It will find that its student body looks different — just not in the way it intended.