The University of California (UC) system is facing renewed pressure from faculty members to reconsider its ban on the SAT and other standardized tests in undergraduate admissions, a debate fueled by concerns over student preparedness in key academic areas. The discussion comes nearly three years after the system initially moved away from test requirements, citing equity concerns.

In June, more than 1,400 UC faculty members in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines signed an open letter asserting that many incoming first-year students lack foundational skills, particularly in math, with some unable to perform middle school-level concepts. This letter was later supported by an additional 1,600 faculty from humanities, social sciences, and the arts, who raised similar concerns about deficiencies in verbal reasoning and writing skills.

UC Berkeley Chancellor Rich Lyons acknowledged the complexity of the issue, emphasizing that standardized tests like the SAT or ACT are not a perfect solution for admissions challenges. He highlighted the need for incoming students to have sufficient writing proficiency and mathematical capability, especially in courses that require calculus. Lyons did not predict the outcome of the ongoing discussions but noted that the work to resolve the debate would be extensive.

The UC system officially announced a review of its admissions test policies on June 11, with any reinstatement of the SAT unlikely to apply before the fall 2028 admission cycle. Faculty advocates have expressed frustration with this timeline, urging university leaders to accelerate the process.

The original decision to eliminate standardized testing, formalized in 2020, was driven in part by the belief that these exams disproportionately disadvantaged students of color who had less access to test preparation resources. UC leaders at the time argued that test scores correlated more closely with socioeconomic status and race than with actual college readiness. That policy move also followed a lawsuit challenging the accessibility and fairness of testing during the COVID-19 pandemic, which ended with an agreement expiring this year.

However, the decision remains contentious. Some faculty and former administrators, such as Kim Wilcox, who led UC Riverside until last year, favor bringing back tests to restore an objective metric of academic preparedness. Critics, meanwhile, caution that reinstating standardized exams risks legal challenges and could provide fodder to federal authorities critical of affirmative action and diversity initiatives. Public Counsel attorney Mark Rosenbaum, who represented students in a prior lawsuit, suggested that federal pressure under the Trump administration may be influencing UC’s reconsideration.

University officials have denied that external political forces, including the Department of Justice, are driving their review. David Volz, chair of the UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools, asserted that concerns about student readiness have existed independently of federal attention and predate the Trump administration.

Two UC work groups are tasked with evaluating whether to require the SAT, ACT, or the California state’s Smarter Balanced test, alongside reexamining high school course requirements. Any proposed changes will require approval from the UC Board of Regents.

Data limitations further complicate the debate, as the system ceased collecting test scores shortly after 2020, limiting comprehensive analysis of correlations between standardized test results and classroom performance. Some campuses, including UC Berkeley and UC San Diego, have conducted smaller-scale assessments of student abilities in math and writing.

Opponents of reinstating the tests argue that existing student outcomes do not justify a return to standardized exams. Jessie Ryan, president of the Campaign for College Opportunity, pointed to steady first-year retention rates near 92% and consistent graduation metrics since the tests were dropped, describing a resumption as addressing "an undefined problem."

As the UC system weighs its next steps, the tension between admissions equity, academic preparedness, political scrutiny, and legal risks remains central to the ongoing discussion.