Test Optional Movement Q&A

Another interesting discussion at WACAC about the Test-Optional movement, which has a growing membership of 700 colleges, presented by admissions officers from Pitzer College and Lawrence University. Good answers to a variety of questions:

• What's the history of the Test Optional movement?
• What's the difference in enrollment and outcome between submitters and non-submitters?
• What part(s) of the application takes the place of emphasis on SAT?
• Do you need to require other classes or remediation for non-submitters?
• What broader correlations do you see with Test Optional?
• How have scholarships changed since going Test Optional?

Bates College was the first school to go Test Optional in 1984. Their publication reports, "In a milestone 20-year study of its well-known policy for optional SATs for admission, Bates College has found no differences in academic performance or graduation rates between submitters and non-submitters." A self-serving, if not provocative, finding. In terms of long-term correlation, Bates saw a 0.1% difference in graduation rate, and a 0.01% GPA difference between submitters and non-submitters.

We all claim that test scores correlate to "success in college," but what does that mean? Are we talking about grades, attendance, matriculation, choice of major, or some more intangible measurements like critical thinking skills, problem solving skills, good ol' fashioned reading, writing, and math skills? It is not surprising that math and science students submit their SAT scores more often than humanities students (math and science colleges want more scores, because they need numbers to stay competitive in their field). Interestingly, the one significant correlation between submitters and non-submitters was that there was a higher percentage of submitters who gained admission to graduate school. Perhaps more interestingly, the study does not specify which group had a higher percentage of students who applied to graduate school in the first place.

The admissions officers at Pitzer and Lawrence continued to challenge our preconceptions of the meaning and validity of these tests. And it's worth asking, WHAT DO TESTS PREDICT? What do they add to our understanding of successful or unsuccessful, however we define that? Lawrence claims that tests make colleges too homogeneous, an amusing if not spot on observation.

Pitzer, part of Claremont Colleges, became Test Optional in 2003. The representative notes that if students have a 3.5 GPA or above, they usually don't submit. Since going Test Optional, Pitzer has seen an increase in students of color, their average GPA has gone up, retention rates have increased, and they have the highest per capita acceptance of Fulbright awards. Even the faculty say students are increasingly creative, thoughtful, and curious.

The Lawrence representative says schools back east want to accept a student, but they don't want those test scores, and this presents a conflict of interest (although it's also a conflict of interest this way: As fewer - and higher - scores are reported, a school's ranking goes up). He notes you'll get more students who resonate with the philosophy of the class, and that's interesting. The biggest flak the school got when it went Test Optional was from alumni. Another point worth noting is that these tests don't assess study skills or time management. Lawrence also saw an increase in applications from students of color, women, and non-native English speakers (though just as telling, there was no increase in the percentage of enrollment). We have multiple intelligences, there are other assessments, we must empower students to represent themselves best. We must ask, what are we about in the admissions process? What are we trying to do at school?

At Pitzer, it's not just an admissions decision (faculty have a say too). There are downsides, like more paperwork and upfront costs in school liasons, and the admissions committee works much harder. Pitzer claims about 50% of its students submit scores (but do they all take it?), and a handful of times scores come up in conversation. A school like Pitzer still does PSAT searches, and they require TOEFL (or Bridge program) for non-native English instruction. But more and more, it's a high school transcript (GPA), and letters of recommendation from teachers that take the place of this standardized weight.

Their last note was a meager plea for a school like Harvard to become Test Optional. They have so many other metrics they can use, and to leverage an Ivy League for looking at admissions differently would cause a sea change not just in the field of higher education, but of holistic education.