By Justin Condevillamar, News Editor
On September 1st 2020, an Alameda County Superior Court judge ruled that the University of California, or UC, must immediately suspend all use of SAT and ACT test scores for admission and scholarship decisions. The ruling came from a lawsuit from an alliance of minority, low income, and disability advocacy groups who argued that the previous test-optional admissions policy was biased against low-income and disabled students who did not have as much access to testing facilities and opportunities because of the pandemic itself or other socio-economic barriers before the pandemic
Supporters of marginalized groups have considered this a major victory for the underprivileged, while certain student groups have opposed this ruling, citing bias against high achieving students, and the overall devaluation of individual college applications. At Mills, the general reaction to the ruling has been mostly positive. The majority opinion was that the elimination of SAT and ACT scores makes college applications less biased for all students, however there is some dissent among students who believed that the SAT was an integral part in the college application process. In a questionnaire sent out to Mills seniors, the consensus was that the SAT or ACT was a valuable part of their college applications before the pandemic, with many students dedicating significant portions of their time and money towards preparing for the SAT/ACT, and taking it multiple times over the span of two years. However, with the arrival of the pandemic, uncertainties over the availability of testing sites have caused students to become concerned over their ability to achieve their optimal SAT/ACT score, or for many, simply getting a score. Most universities accommodated by making their application process test optional, which made students doubtful of the overall value of the standardized tests, but ultimately still put a significant amount of time and effort into prepping and rescheduling their canceled tests. However, the ruling significantly changed the value of the SAT/ACT scores relative to other aspects of the college applications.
Students who had a significant time and economic investment towards the SAT/ACT now can’t use their scores in their UC applications, and have to focus more on other aspects of their college applications and accept the money spent on SAT/ACT prep as a loss. This loss was especially hard-hitting for parents, as many of them financially supported their student’s SAT/ACT prep efforts. One parent who opposed the ruling stated,“We spent all the effort to prepare for the test that is now not useful. We could have used that time to prepare for other things; now it’s unclear what the admission is looking for.” Students who have already taken the SAT/ACT and had spent money on preparation services were split over their opinions on the ruling: some students fully supported it, as gave students who weren’t able to prep or take the test a better opportunity to get into college; some supported the continued used the SAT, but understood the challenges that some students may have due to the pandemic and their background; and some fully opposed the ruling, generally viewing that the removal of the SAT/ACT would eliminate a showing of a significant portion of a student’s abilities. Some believe that the decision would give a significant advantage to underachieving students from disadvantaged background, as those students often had other accommodations such as more counseling time and lower testing standards, and that their backgrounds gave them more of an advantage in the student essay portion of the application, as they faced personal challenges that other students couldn’t replicate. Another major concern over the removal of standardized testing from the UC college applications is that students would now have to focus on their GPA as their main academic strength in their college applications. Keefer Yip (12) shared concerns over the increased valuation of the GPA, stating that “This also only puts more pressure and anxiety on future applicants to do better in school and strengthen their GPA, which doesn’t account for many factors such as stress, anxiety, and other mental health issues.” GPA isn’t the only aspect of college applications that is being more heavily weighed by colleges, as most students are now dedicating their time towards their essays.
Students who had previously valued the SAT/ACT less were more accepting of the ruling and were able to focus more of their time towards maintaining their GPA or working on college applications; many were also appreciative of the ruling, as they personally viewed the standardized testing system as more advantageous for some students and not reflective of the full abilities of them. Sophia Baltasar (12) shared her concerns over the traditional testing structures, stating that “it’s hard already for someone we’ve never met to evaluate us, and having a single test ‘define’ part of our being was not very efficient.” These concerns over the accuracy and fairness of the SAT made up a significant portion of the overall supporting opinion towards the landmark court decision. Supporters of the the removal of the SAT/ACT from the UC applications commonly cited the advantages some students had over others concerning test prep: wealthier families could afford to have their child dedicate more of their time towards academic studies, rather than maintaining household stability though a job or spending significant time helping family members, and they were also able to afford expensive SAT prep services, such as C2 and Princeton Review, that many other students couldn’t afford. Among the students who valued and dedicated resources towards studying for the SAT/ACT, but ultimately supported the ruling, they concurred with the opinion that the SAT/ACT is inherently advantageous for upper class students. Vivian Kwan (12) had previously taken the SAT and used SAT prep, but currently holds her opinion, “I do feel that the SAT/ACT was good for college admissions and helped students show their academic ability, but I understand why people may choose to abolish it.” Students who valued the SAT/ACT, but supported the ruling often had strong academic backgrounds outside of the standardized tests, and were active in extracurriculars such as clubs, volunteering, and sports.
What is agreed on is that the SAT/ACT has decreased in value since the court ruling, and that it is no longer worth the time and effort to study and take the test unless they were applying to schools outside the UC system. All students who were questioned have valued the SAT/ACT less or gave no value to them at all. Vivian Kwan (12) adds that “it feels a bit like I’ve wasted my time now,” which is shared among many students who dedicated time and money towards SAT prep. Most seniors this year have shifted their focus from preparing for the SAT/ACT towards writing their college application essays, with many of them now valuing the essays as the most vital component of their college applications this year, with extracurriculars and GPA also being significant to students. Many seniors also see future students outright not doing the SAT/ACT at all in the future, as the court ruling has been a part of a period of colleges also devaluing the SAT/ACT on student applications. Whether or not students at Mills valued the SAT/ACT seems to be determined by a combination of their personal beliefs combined with how they prepared for the tests. The full effects of the SAT/ACT removal will only be seen when students will be receiving their letters of acceptance or rejections in the spring.
