The University of California (UC) system is undertaking a comprehensive review of both its standardized testing policies and the high school course requirements known as the “A-G” curriculum that California students must complete to qualify for admission. The move, announced in late July 2026, accelerates the timeline for decisions on these key elements, which significantly shape high school education across the state.

The UC Academic Council, the faculty leadership body, tasked the university’s Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools to study the reinstatement of the SAT or ACT first, with a report due by February 12, 2027. The Board of Regents is expected to vote on whether to require standardized testing by June 2027. Following that, the admissions board will assess the A-G course requirements—covering 15 yearlong high school classes across seven subject areas, including history, English, math, science, foreign language, visual and performing arts, and college-preparatory electives—with an initial report planned for May 2027. Any changes to the course requirements would be considered by the regents at a later, unspecified date.

Currently, students applying for fall 2027 admission by the December 1, 2026, deadline will not need to submit SAT or ACT scores. UC officials have indicated that no immediate alterations to admission criteria will be imposed on this applicant pool.

The A-G requirements go beyond California’s high school graduation standards and play a crucial role in defining the academic track for college-bound students in California, as they are shared with the California State University (CSU) system. A UC report found that 98% of California public school students have access to the full A-G curriculum, with the percentage completing it rising from 45% in 2015-16 to 54% in 2024-25. Although 15 courses form the minimum threshold, most UC applicants take between 20 and 30 courses.

The review arrives amid ongoing debates about the adequacy and relevance of the current requirements. UC faculty and others have raised concerns about whether the curriculum is too rigid or insufficient to meet the evolving needs of the workforce and a changing educational landscape influenced by factors such as widespread adoption of artificial intelligence, shifts in learning styles, and the need for real-world skills.

Math requirements, in particular, have been a flashpoint. Historically, the university has sought to broaden math options, including approving data science courses as alternatives to traditional algebra sequences. However, recent reversals by UC faculty have removed some data science courses as acceptable substitutes, citing concerns over inadequate algebra content. Some math professors, like UC Berkeley’s Svetlana Jitomirskaya, have cautioned against loosening critical course requirements such as Algebra II, fearing it could lower preparedness.

At the same time, voices from the education community encourage a balanced approach that recognizes the “crowded curriculum” that California’s K-12 system faces, with new statewide education mandates including ethnic studies, financial literacy, and increased dual enrollment with community colleges. Linda Darling-Hammond, President of the California State Board of Education, supported the review as a necessary evolution to keep pace with economic demands and student pathways that increasingly blend academic and career-focused learning.

Debate over the A-G requirements is not new. Since their establishment in the 1930s and adjustments through the decades, including adoption of Common Core standards and science benchmarks, the requirements have periodically been reassessed. A proposed ethnic studies requirement was recently rejected by UC faculty in April 2025.

Student representatives emphasize maintaining access to rigorous coursework to promote success beyond admission, while some education consultants advocate preserving the current baseline standards to ensure students meet clear academic thresholds.

Overall, UC leaders stress that the review will be collaborative and inclusive, involving K-12 experts, subject specialists, and stakeholders to carefully evaluate how best to define and support college readiness amid changing educational and workforce landscapes.