Only Inquiry and Evidence—Not the SAT—Will Address California’s Math Preparation Challenge

Something important is happening this week: a public discussion of how the University of California will consider calls to revisit the system’s admissions policies. In recent months, a growing chorus of UC professors has elevated concerns about declining preparation of incoming students, insisting that a primary solution lies in reinstating standardized admissions tests, which the system stopped using in 2021.

A key focus has been reports of steep drops in math preparation at UC San Diego, one of the system’s most selective campuses. Though declining math performance has been documented beyond California—worldwide, even—a group of faculty at UCSD joined by others from around the system are seeking to screen out students they consider insufficiently prepared to attend the state’s premier public university. 

Unfortunately, the news media, with few exceptions, have amplified a range of unsupported conclusions and misleading analyses about students’ math preparation. With the echo chamber repeating assertions by math and STEM faculty, the claims on which their case for standardized testing was erected—UCSD’s math placement results—have not received the scrutiny they require. The campus’ failure to disclose changes in its placement rubrics and testing conditions that likely contributed to the disappointing outcomes, for example, went largely unremarked. 

Fortunately, the issue is now moving from the hive mind to the realm of public policy, which will raise the importance of inquiry and evidence. It will become more clear at this week’s regents’ meeting in San Francisco how the UC Academic Senate’s Board of Admissions and Relations With Schools as well as the Board of Regents—where ultimate decisions on admissions rest—will approach any changes to admissions. These include the role of standardized testing and UC’s A–G high school course pattern. 

Just Equations and our partners will be lending our voices and our expertise to inform this process, promote transparency, and ensure equitable and accessible math preparation for students across California. Based on years of analyzing math preparation, one thing is clear: The absence of standardized tests did not cause declines in student math preparation, and reintroducing tests will not reverse those declines. Along with the Campaign for College Opportunity, we are highlighting several reasons why. 

Reinstating the SAT/ACT is not an appropriate solution to the college math preparation dilemma. Nationwide math achievement declines are a result of a number of factors—including pandemic-era disruptions, absenteeism, and the effects of social media. These challenges require a nuanced and innovative response, not a reflexive return to tests that contribute little to predicting student success as compared to high school GPA. Improving college readiness and ensuring equitable access are complementary goals, not competing ones. California should pursue solutions that advance both.    

Requiring STEM-major applicants to take the SAT/ACT will exacerbate inequities. The disparities that led the UC system to eliminate the SAT/ACT requirement in the first place have not changed. As the Smith v. Regents of University of California lawsuit that the UC settled made plain, these tests discriminate against students from historically underrepresented groups, students from families with a low socioeconomic status, and students with disabilities.  

There are a number of options besides reinstating these tests that the UC system should consider to support student STEM-major success. UC campuses such as UCLA have redesigned math courses to increase STEM-major success, particularly for students from historically underrepresented groups. Other California higher education institutions have also reported success with placing STEM majors directly into calculus with additional support, rather than into prerequisite courses.  

Returning to the SAT/ACT contradicts the UC’s mandated purpose. California's public universities should evaluate students based on years of demonstrated academic achievement, perseverance, and preparation, and not on a single exam that reflects unequal access to opportunity. Achieving a student body that is representative of the state’s population is central to the UC’s core mission and admissions policy as a public institution. The elimination of the SAT/ACT requirement has also led to record diversity in the UC’s admitted class, with persistence and graduation rates remaining stable. Reinstating the requirement runs counter to the system’s commitment to a representative student population, especially when other measures, such as high school grades, better support such a student body.  

The national spotlight is on California in this pivotal moment for higher education. It is time for transparency, evidence, and the university’s public mission to guide the next steps for admissions policy. We owe the next generation of Californians nothing less.