In light of the recurring discussions about college admissions after the Supreme Court decision to ban Affirmative Action, there is a repeated query related to test-optional policies directed toward top universities. Many voices criticize the “holistic” college admissions call for re-introducing the mandatory testing policy, arguing that this is a fair and (as suggested by its name) standardized way of assessing candidates. However, demanding the SAT discourages students applying to schools like Harvard from underprivileged and underrepresented backgrounds that universities should be trying to attract.
The SAT can be inaccessible in plenty of ways. For some, taking the test is not physically possible, or at least extremely difficult. Annabelle Rayson ’27 explained the boundaries some international students or students living in rural areas face when accessing testing sites. “In Southwestern Ontario, I would have had to drive 2-3 hours to a major city center to write the SATs. By having optional SATs, an Ivy League education becomes more accessible for rural and remote students,” she said. Those boundaries can be very hard to overcome, especially if a student cannot drive themselves to the test center, be driven by someone else, do not have a car, or cannot cover the costs of transportation and taking the test.
When a test-optional policy is in place, students who struggle with SAT accessibility have a more equitable opportunity to apply and get admitted to elite universities. Since implementing a test-optional policy, Harvard has already seen an increase in applications and admits from outside the US. In an interview with Harvard Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid William R. Fitzsimmons ’67, the Harvard Crimson reported that when comparing early admission rounds between the Class of 2024 and 2028, there was an almost two-time increase in the number of international students accepted (from 9.6% to 17%). Without demanding SAT scores, Harvard can receive applications from a wider set of backgrounds and create a more diverse class.
Groups for whom taking the SAT is logistically or financially harder are also often the groups that have been historically underrepresented in American colleges. These students often have the fewest examples of successful Harvard admits in their community and, as a result, can easily underestimate their chances for acceptance. In general, a study by Caroline Hoxby from Stanford University and Christopher Avery from Harvard Kennedy School shows that historically underrepresented students apply to selective colleges with much lesser frequency than their higher-income, similarly performing counterparts.
This effect is strengthened by the fact that low-income students cannot often access preparation materials, help from private tutors, or classes about test strategies. As opposed to their more affluent peers with dozens of sources of support, underprivileged students must rely upon themselves or limited free testing materials when approaching standardized testing. This is reflected in the results. According to a 2015 study by Insider Higher Ed, there is a strong correlation between parents’ income and their child’s SAT scores. Currently, if students without such resources do not feel as if they can do well enough on their SAT, they can apply to Harvard without submitting a score. In a world with mandatory standardized testing, they may not even apply if their score is not on par with their well-resourced peers.
The SAT’s superscore model complicates its ability to be equitable even further—the more times you can afford to take the test, the better chance of achieving a higher superscore. A person who can take the SAT 5 times can more easily achieve a higher score than a person taking the test once or twice. Even in the case when someone is eligible for a fee waiver given by the College Board, one cannot take more than two tests using that fee waiver. It means that the group of students that are acknowledged not to be able to afford the test are not even allowed to try as many times as they want to.
Some could argue that the SAT is a necessary tool to assess someone’s readiness for college and academic success. However, there are already plenty of ways for students to show that. High school transcripts, professional recommendations, and even the alumni interview all serve to show academic maturity and the ability to keep up with a college’s workload. If students believe their academic abilities are better presented when including their standardized testing score results, they should be able to submit them. If not, the admissions office still has enough information to make an admissions decision.
It should be asked whether spending copious time preparing for the SAT to score in the high 1500s is the activity we want to encourage in high schoolers. Practicing for the SAT is mostly about becoming a better test taker, not a student in general. Learning the test strategies has little to do with knowledge that can be used in college or personal growth. From the perspective of building a diverse, interesting student body, Harvard should incentivize students to do activities that make them unique instead of studying methods to game the SAT.
In the post-Affirmative Action world, we should strive to find ways to make the Harvard Admission procedures more inclusive. The Supreme Court has already limited how admissions can take into account students’ backgrounds. Harvard should strive to still attract and admit students from non-traditional backgrounds—requiring the SAT does the opposite.
Natalia Siwek ’27 (nataliasiwek@college.harvard.edu) took her SAT three weeks before the application deadline because she thought she wouldn’t apply to Harvard.