Is the ‘Test-Optional’ Racist Scheme Under Threat? - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics

Is the ‘Test-Optional’ Racist Scheme Under Threat?

by

Elite colleges are engaged in a balancing act: They are trying to maintain their reputation for having the best students while also giving an admissions advantage to their preferred races. In recent years, the desire for racial diversity has trumped academic excellence. This reality was clearly demonstrated in the Supreme Court cases Harvard v. Students for Fair Admissions and University of North Carolina v. Students for Fair Admissions. The cases numerically showed the extent to which these universities choose less-qualified black and Hispanic students over better-qualified Asian and white students. At Harvard University, for instance, black applicants in the fourth-lowest decile of academic achievement had a greater chance of admission than Asian students in the top decile of academic achievement.

In reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling that racial preferences in college admissions are illegal under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, many colleges have moved to permanently eliminate standardized testing requirements so as to continue preferring less-qualified black and Hispanic students over better-qualified Asian and white students without getting caught.

Some colleges that have eliminated standardized testing requirements have been quite clear that they intend to surreptitiously continue using race. For example, the president of the University of Louisville, which has gone test-optional, stated in the wake of the Students for Fair Admissions decisions that the university would instead use “experience with race” in admissions decisions. “[W]e’re going to drive a truck through experience with race in terms of our admissions,” said President Kim Schatzel. In addition, the University of California voted in 2020 to totally remove standardized testing from admissions decisions in the name of equity.

While going test-optional gives colleges license to continue racially discriminating without getting caught, it has a negative side effect: It decreases the quality of a college’s student body. This is because standardized testing is the best predictor of academic success and a strong predictor of post-college success. Eliminating this accurate predictor makes it difficult for colleges to choose the best students.

While numerous colleges have opted to forego standardized testing requirements in order to evade allegations of racial discrimination, there is now a small movement among elite universities to reintroduce standardized testing requirements. These schools are recognizing the fact that standardized testing is critical to achieving their goal of building an elite student body. This goal is important to them because the value of the degrees they grant lies in the perception that their students are talented and successful (and less in their ability to actually teach their students).

This week, Brown University announced that it will require students to submit standardized testing scores in the upcoming admissions cycle. In doing so, Brown joins Yale, Dartmouth, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in ditching pandemic-era test-optional policies. In making the announcement, Brown cited the benefit of standardized testing for building an excellent student body: “Our analysis made clear that SAT and ACT scores are among the key indicators that help predict a student’s ability to succeed and thrive in Brown’s demanding academic environment.” When Yale made its announcement that it would restore its testing requirement, it stated that standardized testing is actually the best indicator of academic success at Yale.

Brown also sought to claim that standardized testing is beneficial to its goal of achieving racial diversity. “The committee was concerned that some students from less-advantaged backgrounds are choosing not to submit scores under the test-optional policy, when doing so would actually increase their chances of being admitted,” the university said. Similarly, Dartmouth has claimed that standardized testing is helpful in identifying low-income students who will be successful in college.

Brown’s decision to restore its testing requirement even though doing so will make it accountable for whether it fairly judges students of all races shows that the ideology of diversity, equity, and inclusion has not totally overtaken the university. It still maintains a drive to produce students who are academically talented, regardless of race. However, while merit has triumphed over racial bias in regard to Brown’s standardized testing policy, this does not mean that the university will not practice racial discrimination in admissions. The school is simply not so wildly ideological as to eliminate the best indicator of merit.

The decisions of these top schools to restore testing requirements could put pressure on other schools to restore their requirements. This is because standardized testing’s ability to most accurately predict student success will mean that schools that require it will be more effective at admitting the best students. In addition, these schools’ standardized testing policies could give them a reputation for admitting the best students, given that it is well-known that standardized testing is highly effective at identifying people who will be successful. Thus, in elite colleges’ race to enroll the best students and better their reputations in comparison to one another, the ones with standardized testing requirements will have an advantage over the ones that do not.

This could mean that more elite schools will shift back toward requiring standardized testing. However, the incentive to compete will also be tempered by college administrations’ preferences for certain races over others, as well as their ideological commitment to equity over merit.

Brown’s decision to restore its standardized testing requirement gives hope that merit will still be valued in higher education. However, it remains uncertain whether this is a minor gesture by a school seeking to increase its competitiveness or a genuine progression toward the prioritization of merit over equity.

RELATED:

Year Begins With Major Defeat for DEI as Harvard’s Claudine Gay Resigns

College President Details Plan to Use Race in Admissions

Following Affirmative Action’s Demise, Slay the DEI Leviathan

Ellie Gardey
Follow Their Stories:
View More
Ellie Gardey is Reporter and Associate Editor at The American Spectator. She is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame, where she studied political science, philosophy, and journalism. Ellie has previously written for the Daily Caller, College Fix, and Irish Rover. She is originally from Michigan. Follow her on X at @EllieGardey. Contact her at egardey@spectator.org.
Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register


By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!