The University of California (UC) system is at a crossroads, evaluating whether to reintroduce standardized testing as a requirement for undergraduate admissions. This decision comes amid growing concerns about student preparedness, particularly in college-level mathematics. The debate has intensified as the UC Regents prepare to confront this contentious issue once again.
Robert Kaplan, a senior scholar at the Stanford University School of Medicine’s Clinical Excellence Research Center, argues that the focus should not be solely on the SAT but on rebuilding the entire admissions process. He highlights the challenges admissions committees face due to grade inflation, the impact of artificial intelligence on student essays, and the need for more candid recommendation letters.
Challenges in the Current Admissions Process
The admissions process has become increasingly difficult for committees to navigate. Fifty years ago, a perfect GPA was a rare achievement, but today, near-perfect GPAs are commonplace among applicants to elite universities. Recommendation letters often avoid mentioning weaknesses, making it challenging to distinguish between exceptional applicants. Additionally, the rise of artificial intelligence has made student essays less valuable, as polished prose can be generated quickly with assistance from teachers, counselors, and private consultants.
Once students reach college, grade inflation becomes even more pronounced. During the 2026–25 academic year, 84% of grades issued at Harvard were ‘A’ or ‘A-,’ compared with 24% in 2005. Similar trends have been reported for most elite campuses, including UC Berkeley. When nearly everyone receives the highest grades, those grades lose much of their meaning, making standardized tests one of the few measures that consistently distinguish applicants.
The Role of Standardized Tests in Admissions
Supporters of standardized tests argue that they provide an objective measure of academic ability and predict college success. However, opponents contend that test scores disadvantage students from historically underrepresented and lower-income backgrounds. Kaplan emphasizes that the debate should not be framed as a choice between fairness and academic excellence but as a need to restore the credibility of the entire admissions process.
Public universities, particularly in California, should be concerned about the impact of standardized tests on diversity, equity, and inclusion. Californians at every income level support the UC system through their taxes. An admissions system that increasingly favors students with the greatest educational advantages risks weakening higher education’s role as a pathway to opportunity and economic mobility.
Exploring Alternative Testing Options
The University of California is considering not only the SAT and ACT but also the Smarter Balanced exams, which are annual math and English tests given to 11th graders in California public schools. Proponents argue that the Smarter Balanced tests are better aligned with state curriculum and could result in a more racially and socioeconomically diverse applicant pool. However, critics say the exams are not designed to be high-stakes admission tests.
The committee charged with exploring these options will investigate the possibility of using Smarter Balanced exams as an admissions tool. The committee will consist mostly of faculty and include additional UC staff as well as a representative from the California state Board of Education. They will submit a final recommendation by May.
Supporters of using Smarter Balanced scores argue that the test is more equitable than the SAT and ACT, which critics say are biased toward affluent students. The Smarter Balanced assessments are aligned with California’s Public school curriculum and measure whether students are meeting state standards in math and English. Some research suggests that using Smarter Balanced scores in admissions could result in a more racially and socioeconomically diverse applicant pool.
However, some math faculty prefer the SAT and ACT because they test students on more advanced math topics than the Smarter Balanced exam. There is also concern that the Smarter Balanced assessment is not designed to be a high-stakes exam and that repurposing it for admissions could be problematic. It is unclear what it would mean for applicants from private schools and from other states.
The decision to use Smarter Balanced scores as an admissions tool was introduced in, but a 2026 committee report concluded that the test was not designed to be a high-stakes exam and that repurposing it as one would likely lead to the same inequitable practices associated with the SAT. Despite this, the general sentiment among the members of the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools (BOARS) is that a lot has changed since that report was published, including the proliferation of artificial intelligence and its impact on student learning.
Supporters of using Smarter Balanced scores argue that the exam already evaluates college readiness based on students’ mastery of the state’s Common Core standards. They question why valuable information should be thrown away, especially when the problem that these petitions are articulating is a preparation problem. Further study is needed to determine how the Smarter Balanced scores could best be utilized in admissions.
The University of California’s exploration of new standardized testing options highlights the complex challenges in college admissions. As the system seeks to ensure student preparedness and promote diversity, it must carefully weigh the pros and cons of each testing option. The decision will have significant implications for students, educators, and the future of higher education in California.
