Standardized tests: a predictive measure for college success?

Written by Kaylee Leone | June 13th, 2024

The role of standardized testing in college admissions has been a long-standing and contentious debate. For decades, exams like the SAT and ACT have served as benchmarks for measuring student aptitude and college readiness. However, recent developments—such as universities temporarily or permanently dropping test requirements—have reignited discussions about whether these tests truly serve their intended purpose or merely reinforce existing educational inequities. This article explores arguments on both sides, drawing from a variety of sources to assess the relevance of standardized testing in today’s higher education landscape.

Supporters contend that standardized tests offer a consistent measure to assess students from various educational settings on an equal basis. Given the wide variation in grading policies, course offerings, and curriculum rigor among high schools, standardized exams provide a common metric for comparison. Admissions officers often struggle to evaluate students equitably when high schools differ drastically in resources, teaching quality, and grading standards. A student with a 4.0 GPA from one school may not have experienced the same level of academic rigor as a student with a lower GPA from a more challenging institution. Standardized tests, in theory, help mitigate these discrepancies.

Several studies suggest that standardized test scores are a strong predictor of college success. Research has consistently shown that SAT and ACT scores correlate with first-year college GPA and long-term academic performance, often outperforming high school GPA as an indicator of persistence and graduation rates.

A key reason for this predictive power is that standardized exams test critical reading, mathematical reasoning, and analytical writing—skills necessary for handling college coursework. Universities that have reinstated test requirements, such as Cornell and Stanford, argue that standardized tests provide crucial insights into a student’s ability to manage academic rigor, particularly in fields like STEM and business, where foundational quantitative and problem-solving skills are essential. Additionally, some studies suggest that students with strong SAT or ACT scores are more likely to persist through their degree programs, as they may already possess the analytical and time-management skills needed to succeed in a collegiate environment.

Beyond predicting success, standardized tests can highlight academically talented students who may not have access to elite preparatory resources. Students from underprivileged backgrounds who achieve high SAT/ACT scores demonstrate potential in a way that grade inflation or extracurricular achievements may not.

For instance, a student from a low-income school with limited AP or honors courses may still prove their academic ability through standardized testing. Likewise, universities that utilize standardized tests in combination with other metrics can identify promising students from diverse backgrounds, ensuring that students with strong academic potential are not overlooked due to disparities in educational resources.

To address accessibility concerns, several organizations, including the College Board, have launched initiatives aimed at providing free test preparation resources, fee waivers, and expanded testing opportunities to lower-income students. These efforts seek to mitigate socioeconomic barriers, allowing all students the opportunity to perform to their full potential on standardized assessments.

While standardized tests offer a consistent benchmark, critics argue that they reinforce socioeconomic inequalities and fail to capture the full spectrum of a student’s abilities. One of the most significant criticisms of standardized testing is that it disproportionately favors students from affluent backgrounds. Wealthier families can afford expensive test prep courses, private tutoring, and multiple test attempts, all of which can significantly boost scores. By contrast, students from lower-income families may lack access to high-quality preparation resources, putting them at a disadvantage before they even sit for the exam.

Moreover, research has found that standardized test scores often correlate more strongly with a student’s socioeconomic status rather than their actual academic ability or potential. High-income students, on average, score higher on the SAT and ACT due to access to better schools, advanced coursework, and additional educational support. This systemic disparity creates an uneven playing field in college admissions and perpetuates inequities in higher education access.

In addition to financial disparities, students from underprivileged backgrounds may face logistical challenges, such as difficulty accessing testing centers, limited availability of testing dates, and additional stress from financial instability. These factors can further impact performance, leading critics to argue that standardized testing places undue burdens on students who are already navigating systemic educational disadvantages.

Beyond socioeconomic concerns, standardized tests have been criticized for their narrow scope. Critics highlight that test-based assessments fail to measure essential skills like creativity, resilience, leadership, and interpersonal communication—traits that are increasingly valued in higher education and the workforce.

Employers and educators alike emphasize the importance of critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration—skills that standardized tests do not adequately capture. A student’s ability to thrive in a dynamic learning environment, contribute to campus life, and excel in professional settings often depends on qualities that cannot be quantified through multiple-choice exams. This has led some institutions to prioritize alternative assessment methods, such as project-based evaluations, competency-based learning models, and holistic admissions criteria.

Many universities are reconsidering the role of standardized tests, as seen during the test-optional movement fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools like the University of California have permanently removed standardized tests from their admissions process, arguing that they do not add meaningful insight beyond high school GPA and coursework rigor. Studies suggest that factors like student essays, letters of recommendation, and extracurricular involvement may provide a more comprehensive view of an applicant’s potential.

Additionally, some argue that standardized tests are not the best measure of student learning. Alternative assessment models, such as competency-based evaluations, project-based assessments, and portfolio reviews, provide a more holistic picture of student achievement. These methods aim to evaluate a student's ability to apply knowledge in real-world settings rather than relying on a single exam score.

Despite the pushback, several institutions have reversed test-optional policies. Elite universities such as Harvard, Stanford, and Cornell have reinstated test requirements, citing concerns about grade inflation and the need for objective metrics in admissions. Some critics of the test-optional movement argue that removing standardized tests has led to more subjectivity in admissions, which could introduce bias in favor of students with access to prestigious extracurricular activities or strong personal essays.

Additionally, some experts warn that the College Board’s continued adjustments to the SAT, such as making it easier to achieve high scores, may dilute the test’s effectiveness as a differentiator among applicants.

The question of whether standardized tests should play a central role in college admissions does not have a simple answer. On one hand, they offer a common yardstick to compare students across different educational backgrounds, helping universities identify top-performing applicants. On the other hand, they risk reinforcing systemic inequities and failing to measure non-cognitive skills crucial for success.

A balanced approach may be necessary—one where standardized tests are considered alongside a holistic review of each applicant’s high school performance, extracurricular involvement, and personal qualities. By continuing to refine admission criteria, colleges can strive to make the process both equitable and effective in identifying students best suited for their academic programs. The conversation surrounding standardized testing is far from over, and as more data emerges, higher education institutions must adapt to best serve students from all walks of life.

Sources:

1.     "5 Tips for Ivy League Applicants Following Harvard’s Return to the SAT." Forbes, 16 Apr. 2024, www.forbes.com/sites/marlenacorcoran/2024/04/16/5-tips-for-ivy-league-applicants-following-harvards-return-to-the-sat/

2.     "40 Years After ‘A Nation at Risk’: Could Curriculum Reform Finally Move the Needle on Academic Improvement?" The 74 Million, www.the74million.org/article/40-years-after-a-nation-at-risk-could-curriculum-reform-finally-move-the-needle-on-academic-improvement/

3.     "Cornell Becomes Latest Ivy League to Reinstate Standardized Testing Requirement for Admissions." National Review, www.nationalreview.com/news/cornell-becomes-latest-ivy-league-to-reinstate-standardized-testing-requirement-for-admissions/

4.     "Kaplan – World Changing Ideas 2024." Fast Company, www.fastcompany.com/91073295/kaplan-world-changing-ideas-2024

5.     "More Proof of the Value of Standardized Test Scores." National Review, www.nationalreview.com/corner/more-proof-of-the-value-of-standardized-test-scores/

6.     "Rural N.Y. School Superintendents on Financial Challenges." Spectrum Local News, 12 Jan. 2024, spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/central-ny/politics/2024/01/12/rural-n-y--school-superintendents-on-financial-challenges

7.     "Should Colleges Consider Standardized Tests in Admissions?" The New York Times, 23 Jan. 2024, www.nytimes.com/2024/01/23/learning/should-colleges-consider-standardized-tests-in-admissions.html

8.     "Stanford to Require Standardized Tests for Admission." San Francisco Chronicle, www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/stanford-require-standardized-tests-admission-19503338.php

9.     "Standardized Testing Is a Flawed Yardstick for Assessing Educational Success." Nevada Current, 15 May 2024, www.nevadacurrent.com/2024/05/15/standardized-testing-is-a-flawed-yardstick-for-assessing-educational-success/

10.  "The College Board Is Dumbing Down Its SAT Test Again – Doing No One Any Favors." Manhattan Institute, www.manhattan.institute/article/the-college-board-is-dumbing-down-its-sat-test-again-doing-no-one-any-favors

11.  "The End of an Academic Illusion." National Review, www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-end-of-an-academic-illusion/

12.  "The Failed Experiment with Ending Standardized Testing." National Review, www.nationalreview.com/2024/04/the-failed-experiment-with-ending-standardized-testing/

13.  "The SATs, College, and Wealth." Time, www.time.com/6968218/the-sats-college-wealth-essay/

14.  "The Science of Reading in 2024: 5 State Initiatives to Watch." Education Week, 2024, www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/the-science-of-reading-in-2024-5-state-initiatives-to-watch/2024/01

15.  "What’s the Right Goal for Student Achievement? Is 50% Proficiency Enough?" The 74 Million, www.the74million.org/article/whats-the-right-goal-for-student-achievement-is-50-proficiency-enough-63/

16.  "Why Some Universities Are Returning to Standardized Testing in Admissions Process." PBS NewsHour, www.pbs.org/newshour/show/why-some-universities-are-returning-to-standardized-testing-in-admissions-process

17.  "Why Standardized Tests Still Matter." The New York Times, 27 Jan. 2024, www.nytimes.com/2024/01/27/opinion/sat-tests.html

18.  "Why We Should Keep Standardized Testing." The New York Times, 17 Jan. 2024, www.nytimes.com/2024/01/17/opinion/standardized-tests.html

"Will Standardized Testing Make a Comeback?" CNN, 21 Apr. 2024,www.cnn.com/2024/04/21/business/sat-college-requirement-2024-test/index.html