Boston University made standardized testing optional for undergraduates applying for either semester in the 2021-2022 academic year. The University attributes its decision to the added difficulties of the admissions and testing process during the pandemic. 

Test-optional admissions are not new. Hundreds of universities across the country have adopted a flexibility regarding standardized tests. The University of Chicago and University of California are both test-optional, though the UC system might defeat their purpose if the SAT and ACT are replaced with their own test in development.

Standardized testing contributes to a vastly inequitable system that exacerbates income, knowledge and performance gaps. 

Students who attend large, affluent high schools can often afford to not only take standardized tests, but also buy the practice exams, hire tutors and retake it until they get their desired score. 

BU’s admission process is also one of many that allows applicants to superscore their SAT or ACT results, which selects your best section scores from each testing round to produce your highest composite score. So, students who have the means to take the test multiple times will have a better chance of landing themselves in the top percentile.

Lower-income students who come from underfunded public schools aren’t afforded the same opportunities or resources. And due to systemic issues, minority students are put at an even greater disadvantage by segregated housing policies, education inequity and compounded generational oppression.

There was a 260 point difference between the average scores of students from families with an income of more than $200,000 and students from families with an income of less than $20,000, according to 2016 SAT score gap data.

And even though SAT participation gaps have begun to close, the racial score gap is as prevalent as ever. Average scores of Black, Latino and Hispanic students were more than 100 points lower than white and Asian students in 2020, according to a Brookings investigation.

Students who have to work part-time while attending school have less time to study for the SAT or ACT than students who don’t. 

Students who can afford tutors to teach them the structure and pacing of test questions will out-perform someone who has the same knowledge of the material but doesn’t know the strategies.

Students who don’t test well, whose learning styles are incompatible with the testing format or who are bad at memorization are all misrepresented by these tests.

It’s a test of privilege rather than intelligence.

Making test scores optional rather than a requirement also seems to make the admissions process more accessible. Students who aren’t able to take the test or who wouldn’t be considered because of their test scores will be able to get their foot in the door when they couldn’t before. 

However, adopting a test-optional policy wouldn’t entirely improve the admissions process. 

Students across the world have varying degrees of access to extracurriculars and opportunities at their high schools. Repealing test score requirements may take away from their chances at making an impression on admissions officers because standardized testing is one of the only ways to have an equal footing.

Furthermore, if standardized testing is made optional, it may end up giving students who have access to educational resources more of an advantage — they can submit their scores while a large portion of applicants don’t opt to submit theirs.

And it’s hard to imagine that some other aspect of the application won’t take the place of SAT and ACT scores: internships, community service hours and so on. These are also areas that systemic inequalities and privilege play a role in.

Going test optional may also be the easy way out for universities to appear equitable. 

At BU, students Daniel Kelly and Julian Tran are trying to rally the community behind a two-pronged campaign to remove the testing requirement and form an ad-hoc committee to reform the admissions process as a whole. This could be a solution beyond focusing only on standardized tests.

But even if standardized tests being optional in college application processes were an unequivocally positive thing, and even if admission processes are reformed, it would still be akin to a Band-Aid over a large, gaping wound.

The issue of standardized testing is that universities can make it optional, but they can’t get rid of it or the system perpetuating its flaws.

There’s a much deeper issue that can be traced back to the beginning of students’ primary education. It’s a state and city-level issue with the segregation and funding of public schools — we need a fundamental change so all students receive a solid foundational education that starts as early as elementary school.

What we actually need to change, BU has no control over.

In the end, making test scores optional is a weighted decision. It’s not so cut and clear as it may first appear. In some ways, it might help level the playing field, but in others, the playing field will likely remain the same. In the case of some students, it may just end up doing more harm than good.