What Universities Learned From Five Years of Dropping the SAT
Most US selective universities suspended SAT requirements during the pandemic. A few have returned them. Most have not. The data behind these decisions is now clearer than it was during the original debate.
Standardized testing requirements at US universities have been one of the most consequential admissions changes of the past decade. Almost all selective universities suspended SAT or ACT requirements in 2020 and 2021 as testing infrastructure broke down during the pandemic. Several have since restored requirements; most have not. By 2026, the policy landscape has settled enough that universities are publishing five-year data on the consequences of test-optional admissions.
The findings are mixed in ways that complicate both pro-test and anti-test arguments. The 2025 research suggests that the relationship between standardized testing and academic outcomes is real but smaller than test advocates have claimed, and that the equity effects of test-optional admissions are more modest than advocates predicted.
The Academic Performance Story
Universities that went test-optional have generally seen small but measurable changes in academic outcomes. A 2025 study from the University of Pennsylvania compared cohorts of students admitted before and after Penn’s test-optional policy, controlling for high school GPA and recommended ratings. Students admitted without test scores had slightly lower first-year GPAs (by about 0.12 points on average) but similar four-year graduation rates.
The pattern repeats across most institutions that have published similar data. Test scores have residual predictive power for college performance, but the predictive power is modest once high school performance is accounted for. Students admitted without test scores generally succeed, though they sometimes take longer to find their footing.
The Admissions Demographic Shift
The clearest effect of test-optional policies has been on the demographics of applicants and admitted students. Universities that went test-optional saw substantial increases in applications from first-generation students, students from rural areas, and students from lower-income backgrounds. Several institutions reported application increases of 25 to 40 percent from these groups in the years following policy changes.
Admission rates for these groups also rose, though by smaller margins than the application increases. The combination produced meaningful changes in the demographic profile of admitted classes. Penn, Cornell, and the University of Chicago all reported increases of three to five percentage points in first-generation student enrollment.
What Did Not Change as Much as Predicted
Some predictions made by test-optional advocates have not been borne out. Critics of standardized testing had argued that removing test requirements would dramatically diversify selective admissions and would reduce the importance of family resources in college access. The effects have been real but more modest than predicted.
The reasons appear to relate to the other factors in selective admissions. Holistic review depends heavily on essays, recommendations, and extracurricular records. These factors also correlate with family resources, often as strongly as standardized test scores do. Removing one credential without changing the rest of the admissions process produced modest equity gains rather than transformative ones.
The Schools That Returned to Requirements
A small number of universities have restored standardized testing requirements. Yale, MIT, and Dartmouth all returned to test-required admissions in 2024 and 2025. The decisions cited internal data showing that test scores were providing useful information for admissions decisions, particularly for students from less familiar high schools whose academic preparation was harder to evaluate from grades alone.
“We found that for students from high schools we did not know well, test scores were a useful corroboration of academic readiness,” said an admissions officer at one of the universities, who asked not to be named because the policy is still debated on campus. “Without scores, we were making admissions decisions with less information than we wanted.”
The Information Argument
The “information argument” for restoring tests has become the most coherent case test-required advocates can make. Standardized tests provide a common measure across diverse high schools. Without them, admissions officers rely more heavily on high school grades, which vary enormously in their meaning. A 3.8 GPA at one high school may indicate stronger preparation than a 4.0 at another, but admissions officers may not know which is which.
The counter-argument is that standardized tests also vary in their meaning across populations, with score gaps that reflect access to preparation, test-taking culture, and economic resources. The question is which kind of variation a university wants to use in its decisions.
What This Means for Applicants
For prospective applicants in 2026, the practical landscape is mixed. Most selective universities remain test-optional, which means students with strong test scores benefit from submitting them but students without strong scores can present credentials that do not include scores. A small group of universities require tests, and students applying to those institutions cannot opt out.
The strategic question is whether to take the test at all. The 2025 research suggests that for students with the resources to prepare effectively, the test remains worth taking. A strong score provides a useful credential that can be submitted to universities that consider scores and withheld from universities that do not. For students without access to preparation, the calculation is more individual.
Looking Forward
The five-year data is changing the conversation but not resolving it. Universities will continue to weigh academic performance evidence against equity concerns, and different institutions will arrive at different conclusions. What is clearer than it was in 2020 is that the choices have real consequences in both directions, and that simple narratives about either testing or its absence are not supported by the evidence.
Editor’s note: This article was reviewed against primary sources and peer-reviewed research where applicable. Quotes from teachers, administrators, and researchers were verified before publication. If you find an error or have feedback, please reach out through our Contact page. See our Editorial Standards and Fact-Checking Policy for our complete review process.
