Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    AI and Microcredentials
Sign In
The Review

In Defense of Standardized Testing in Admissions

By Ethan S. Ake-Little February 10, 2019
In Defense of Standardized Testing  in College Admissions 1
iStock

This past year might be remembered in the annals of education as the beginning of the end for standardized testing. Institutions long venerated for their academic quality, such as Colby College and the University of Chicago, have become new disciples of the test-optional movement, with the University of California considering such a move systemwide. But as is the case with many educational fads, ideology can often eclipse substance.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

This past year might be remembered in the annals of education as the beginning of the end for standardized testing. Institutions long venerated for their academic quality, such as Colby College and the University of Chicago, have become new disciples of the test-optional movement, with the University of California considering such a move systemwide. But as is the case with many educational fads, ideology can often eclipse substance.

Perhaps the greatest charge levied against standardized testing is that it routinely disqualifies otherwise capable disadvantaged students from the admissions process. It is worth noting, however, that the proposed alternatives — emphasizing high-school transcripts, extracurricular activities, and letters of recommendations — would do little to address that accusation.

Students from disadvantaged backgrounds, who tend to either be underrepresented minorities or hail from economically depressed regions, have probably been educated in elementary and secondary schools that cannot compete in terms of the impressive array of courses found in their more affluent public- or independent-school peers. Nor does this population have access to chic extracurriculars and international service trips that can dazzle admissions officers. Moreover, the opportunity to work in superstar internships, where a letter of recommendation from an alumnus can grab the attention of admissions gatekeepers, is well beyond the reach of many of those students.

Regrettably, some of the most underprivileged schools are so woefully bereft of resources that they barely have enough desks for students or an adequate supply of teachers, let alone extra money to invest in varsity crew and squash teams. For those students, standardized testing is the best way for them to compete on equal footing. Interestingly, the very same test-optional institutions require international and home-schooled students to submit standardized-test scores, signaling that administrators are acutely aware of their own policy’s limitations.

The barriers for disadvantaged students do not evaporate after admission. Because most of those students cannot shoulder the burden of ever-increasing tuition, they rely on as much aid as possible. However, while many test-optional institutions may not require standardized-test scores for admission, those applicants may be at a disadvantage when being considered for merit-based aid.

Adding to those students’ financial woes, upon enrollment, they must often take remedial courses, which do not count toward a degree but still cost money. All things considered, what appears to be a blessing to disadvantaged students by way of test-optional admissions quickly turns into an academic and financial boondoggle.

The test-optional movement has even seeped into the world of graduate education. Regrettably, as is the case in much of higher education, reputation and rankings matter. Graduate departments prefer candidates who have gone to what they believe to be the best colleges, and in the absence of some standardized metric such as the GRE, graduate admissions will face the same problems as their undergraduate counterparts.

Another criticism of standardized testing is that it fails to predict first-year grades at either the undergraduate or graduate level. That is true — not because standardized tests are inaccurate measurement instruments, but because grade inflation has made it virtually impossible to accurately predict academic quality to any substantial degree. At the undergraduate level, A’s have become so ordinary that they now constitute 43 percent of grades awarded, with D’s and F’s accounting for less than 10 percent. Even at the graduate level, an A has become the de facto grade and the C a proxy for outright failure.

That lax grading has led to a statistical irony of sorts. Standardized testing is grounded in the field of psychometrics, which uses rigorous statistical analyses to measure mental capacity. Standardized-test scores are thus normed to a virtually perfect bell curve that accounts for the breadth of content, level of skill mastery, and difficulty of questions based on the entire population of test takers, past and present.

However, when that perfect distribution of standardized-test scores is compared to the highly skewed distribution of grades in higher education, there is little commonality between the two curves. Consequently, this leads to the flawed impression that the former does not accurately predict the latter when, in fact, the problem does not lie with the scientific development and scoring of standardized tests, but with the highly subjective and inconsistent nature of grading in higher education.

The claims against standardized testing overlook a fundamental point: It is not testing that needs re-evaluation but curricular and instructional quality in higher-education programs. Rather than using standardized-testing data to implement a rigorous and coherent program of study, complete with improvements in instruction, higher education has opted for the path of least resistance — discarding the measurement tool altogether.

ADVERTISEMENT

Moreover, while many educators lament what they believe to be standardized testing’s outsize role in the admission process, it is important to keep in mind that this is not the fault of standardized testing per se, but of the cryptic formulas designed by admissions offices to evaluate candidates. The lawsuit over the admissions process at Harvard University illustrates the whimsical nature of admissions, in which candidates with strong standardized-test scores are dismissed for arbitrary personality traits.

If educators are serious about improving academic standards, they should see standardized testing as an ally rather than a foe, raising the bar instead of eliminating it altogether. Anything less would be what a former president, George W. Bush, once described as “the soft bigotry of low expectations.”

Ethan S. Ake-Little is a Ph.D. candidate in urban education at Temple University.

A version of this article appeared in the February 15, 2019, issue.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Teaching & Learning Admissions & Enrollment Innovation & Transformation Opinion
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Related Content

What One University Likes About a Standardized Test of Student Learning

More News

Photo illustration showing Santa Ono seated, places small in the corner of a dark space
'Unrelentingly Sad'
Santa Ono Wanted a Presidency. He Became a Pariah.
Illustration of a rushing crowd carrying HSI letters
Seeking precedent
Funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions Is Discriminatory and Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Argues
Photo-based illustration of scissors cutting through paper that is a photo of an idyllic liberal arts college campus on one side and money on the other
Finance
Small Colleges Are Banding Together Against a Higher Endowment Tax. This Is Why.
Pano Kanelos, founding president of the U. of Austin.
Q&A
One Year In, What Has ‘the Anti-Harvard’ University Accomplished?

From The Review

Photo- and type-based illustration depicting the acronym AAUP with the second A as the arrow of a compass and facing not north but southeast.
The Review | Essay
The Unraveling of the AAUP
By Matthew W. Finkin
Photo-based illustration of the Capitol building dome propped on a stick attached to a string, like a trap.
The Review | Opinion
Colleges Can’t Trust the Federal Government. What Now?
By Brian Rosenberg
Illustration of an unequal sign in black on a white background
The Review | Essay
What Is Replacing DEI? Racism.
By Richard Amesbury

Upcoming Events

Plain_Acuity_DurableSkills_VF.png
Why Employers Value ‘Durable’ Skills
Warwick_Leadership_Javi.png
University Transformation: a Global Leadership Perspective
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin