Earlier this month, President Trump signed a memorandum requiring increased transparency in higher education admissions. The purpose of the order is to ensure that universities are admitting students based on merit, not race, following the Students for Fair Admissions decision ending racial preferences in higher education.
This is a laudable goal. Universities should prioritize merit over all other admissions considerations. Unfortunately, increased transparency will be useless without a return to standardized testing, which nearly 90 percent of selective colleges eliminated during the pandemic.
The good news is that some elite universities, starting with MIT in 2022, have begun reinstating testing requirements. Under pressure, even Harvard reinstated its requirement in 2024.
That’s because evidence shows that without test scores, admissions become less fair, not more. Without standardized tests, it’s easy for a university to manipulate its admissions to emphasize identity over merit.
Standardized test score is the single best predictor of college performance for any given student. Moreover, research shows that test-optional admissions policies often reduce, rather than increase, socioeconomic diversity. Standardized tests are more objective and comparable, providing a common metric across states, schools and curricula. Tests also help identify high-achieving, low-income students from under-resourced schools who might otherwise be overlooked.
MIT’s admissions director made this point when the school reinstated mandatory testing: “Our research shows standardized tests help us better assess the academic preparedness of all applicants, and also help us identify socioeconomically disadvantaged students who lack access to advanced coursework or other enrichment opportunities that would otherwise demonstrate their readiness for MIT. We believe a requirement is more equitable and transparent than a test-optional policy.”
Other measures are less reliable. GPAs are difficult to compare across high schools, where grade inflation is rampant; more students now graduate with straight A’s than ever before. Moreover, according to recent research, expensive private high schools and suburban high schools are more likely to inflate grades than are urban schools. This makes it harder for low-income students to compete against their more affluent peers when GPA is the only quantitative measure used by the admissions office.
College admissions essays are even less meritocratic. Harvard’s first short-answer prompt reads: “Harvard has long recognized the importance of enrolling a diverse student body. How will the life experiences that shape who you are today enable you to contribute to Harvard?” This is a clear call for the insertion of racial identity into college admissions. It is also an opportunity for well-heeled students to make use of admissions counselors to game the system.
Ditto for extracurriculars and letters of recommendation. As an education reformer, I’m the first to recognize the importance of nonacademic pursuits to help students develop grit, patience, teamwork and other virtues. But it’s far too easy for elite high schools and expensive private counselors to manufacture “perfect” transcripts and glowing recommendations. These should be only tie-breakers, not primary qualifications for admission.
To be sure, standardized tests aren’t perfect. Critics complain that standardized tests are biased. And it’s true that standardized tests mercilessly expose achievement gaps — but they do not cause them. Instead of scrapping the tests, we should laud them for pointing out the underlying problems in K-12 education.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, no one pretends that standardized tests are perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that mandatory testing is the worst form of admissions policy except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
In other words, in a sea of data points, standardized testing is the best we’ve got. Policymakers and university trustees should take steps to once again make standardized tests a mandatory requirement for admissions, ensuring that the process remains transparent and merit-based. This is especially important at our new “Public Ivies,” where fairness, meritocracy and opportunity are central to the public service they perform.
Without standardized tests, higher education risks sliding further into subjectivity, favoritism and insularity. America needs an admissions system that rewards ability and effort — not identity, wealth or connections. Standardized testing remains the most reliable tool we have to uphold meritocracy.
As Trump’s order goes into effect, now is the time for universities and policymakers to act. Transparency and fairness demand objective benchmarks — not opaque, subjective, “holistic” admissions. To ensure equality of opportunity, we must return to recognized standards of merit. It’s well past time to bring back standardized testing.
Jenna Robinson is president of the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
Comments