So are you really test-optional? 

That’s usually the first question I get from skeptics and newcomers to the test-optional movement. Because ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ is in its fourth decade of a test-optional admission policy, as dean of admission and financial aid I’ve served as a sounding board on this topic to high school guidance counselors, students, and families for years.

Now I’m regularly fielding this question and more from admission officials at institutions across the country. Since March, COVID-19 has made it a challenge for high school seniors to take the ACT or SAT, causing many colleges to suddenly adopt test-optional admission policies for the current 2020–21 admission cycle. 

Yes, ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ truly is test-optional. Students simply choose whether they want to submit their ACT or SAT scores as part of their admission application. That’s it. The person quizzing me usually assumes we must secretly prefer the applicants who submit their standardized test scores, right? No. No, we don’t.

“There is clear connect between privilege and the ability to perform well” on standardized tests, says Dean of Admission and Financial Aid Leigh Weisenburger.(Video by Theophil Syslo)

The real skeptics persist. What about students who withhold their scores — that must hurt their chances for admission? The answer again: Nope.

Applicants who choose not to submit their ACT or SAT scores as part of their college application signal to an admission committee what is most important to them and most revealing about their academic capability. They choose how they want to tell their best academic story — scores or no scores — and we follow their lead.

Encouraging personal agency and intentionality is a hallmark of the liberal arts tradition, so why not begin developing those habits and behaviors with and through the college application process itself?

Over 70% of colleges and universities across the nation are now test-optional. This represents a sea change in the admission landscape and higher education, as most institutions are arguably more accessible to a broader range of diverse and talented students than ever before. It’s a liberating opportunity for all involved, as the confining conventions of standardized testing no longer restrict colleges or students.

But it’s natural that students, families, counselors, college admission colleagues, alumni, the media — even “believers” in the movement — have questions. For parents in particular, who remember their own SAT all too well, it can feel very new. Too new. 

Our test-optional admission policy removes a barrier for many students, and we see it as a natural extension of our progressive history and mission dedicated to access and inclusion.

For most of my team, this is all we’ve ever known, and many of us were drawn to ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ professionally because of the college’s progressive legacy as a test-optional pioneer.

In 1984, our admission predecessors and faculty colleagues had the insight and courage to call out the SAT as an imperfect measure of a student’s academic ability and potential, never mind their overall character. In 1990, we did the same for the ACT and went fully test-optional.

They knew then, as we know now, that standardized tests and a student’s subsequent scores are rooted in inequity. There are vast disparities on such tests based on race and socio-economics.

In 2016, scholar and author Ibram X. Kendi described standardized tests as “the most effective racist weapon ever devised to objectively degrade Black minds and legally exclude their bodies.” Our test-optional admission policy removes a barrier for many students, and we see it as a natural extension of our progressive history and mission dedicated to access and inclusion.

5 Tips: ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝’ regular decision deadline is Jan. 11. Here’s some advice for prospective applicants.

+1. Be a high school student.

+2. Think of your college application as your storyline

+3. Use your college essay to your advantage

+4. Ask yourself: What do your scores mean to you?

+5. Connect with the colleges on your list

Test-optional admission also aligns with my own personal story. I was a poor test taker in high school — and I still get anxious when I think about standardized tests.

I had excellent grades in rigorous courses, my writing was solid, I was an active leader in my school and community, I held a part-time job, and much more. What did my scores say about me? Nothing. But they were required, so I took the tests. And I submitted the scores. While I ultimately found my way, had I known about test-optional admission at the time, I might have knocked on different doors and found more open to me.

And consider the data on how our doors open, even without test scores. More than half of the ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ Class of 2024 did not submit their standardized test scores as a part of their admission application. 

They landed at ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ through a holistic admissions approach that values the story a candidate chooses to tell us. There’s one more sweeping question to answer. Why do ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ and so many other institutions care so much about the test-optional movement?

Because we are human, you are human, and the endeavor that is college is a human enterprise. Colleges and universities must be evolutionary organisms. We want to get to know you for who you are. We want to understand the many ways you can grow, develop, and add to the vitality of our intellectual community. Relying on an arbitrary set of scores? Honestly, it doesn’t seem that smart.

The findings of the study will be presented Oct. 1 in Milwaukee at the 60th national conference of the National Association for College Admissions Counseling.

The ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ faculty voted to make SATs optional for admission to ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ in October 1984, and after five years of evaluation voted to make all testing optional in November 1990. From the outset, ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ shared its research results, and at this 20th anniversary, has conducted a comprehensive performance and outcomes analysis of about 7,000 submitters and non-submitters since 1984.

ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ Vice President William C. Hiss, who led the ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ admissions office as dean or vice president from 1978 to 2000, said the findings “raise a national policy issue: Does standardized testing narrow access to higher education, significantly reducing the pool of students who would succeed if admitted?”

Hiss noted that standardized tests can be one of several barriers to higher education. Increased college costs, cuts to K-12 budgets that affect guidance, higher education cuts in either financial aid or course offerings, and standardized testing may all contribute to reduced access for low-income students.

Among the findings of this 20-year study:

• The difference in ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ graduation rates between submitters and non-submitters is 0.1% (one-tenth of one percent).
• The difference in overall GPAs at ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ is .05 (five-hundredths of a GPA point); the exact difference is 3.06 for non-submitters and 3.11 for submitters.
• ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ has almost doubled its applicant pool since making testing optional; about a third of each class at ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ enters without submitting testing in the admissions process.
• Testing is not necessary for predicting good performance; the academic ratings assigned by ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ admissions staff are highly accurate for both submitters and non-submitters in predicting GPA.
• Optional testing policies are often assumed to be a device for affirmative action efforts. Students of color use an optional testing policy at somewhat higher than average rates, and ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ has increased its enrollment of students of color and international students. But white students using the policy outnumber students of color by 5-to-1.
• The policy draws sharply increased application rates from all the subgroups who commonly worry about standardized testing: women, U.S. citizens of color, international citizens, low-income or blue collar students, rural students, students with learning disabilities and students with rated talents in athletics, the arts or debate.
• There are very modest differences in the majors that submitters and non-submitters choose at ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝, but some intriguing patterns: Non-submitters are more likely to major in fields that put a premium on creativity and originality.
• There are modest differences in the career outcomes of submitters and non-submitters, with one glaring exception: the four fields where students have to take another standardized test to gain entrance to graduate programs for medicine, law, an M.B.A. or Ph.D. In fields where success does not depend on further standardized testing—including business executive officers and finance careers—submitters and non-submitters are equally represented.

The National Association for College Admission Counseling’s (NACAC) national conference is the largest annual gathering of college admission professionals. The conference attracts more than 4,000 attendees annually, including secondary school counselors, college admission officers, independent counselors, financial aid administrators, enrollment managers and affiliate organization members.

Related information:

Graphics supporting the findings of the study are available at: h

William C. Hiss’ prepared remarks are available at:

NPR, “All Things Considered”, January 4, 2005:

Outside press responses to William C. Hiss’ study:

PowerPoint presentation on 20-year Optional SAT study to the National Association for College Admissions Counseling national conference in Milwaukee Oct. 1 by William C. Hiss, ŔÖ˛Ą´«Ă˝ College vice president for external affairs. Use of this information is embargoed to Oct.1.

For high resolution graphics suitable for media reproduction, click on the links below.

/images/sat-pp/pp1.jpg

/images/sat-pp/pp2.jpg

/images/sat-pp/pp3.jpg

/images/sat-pp/pp4.jpg