Summary of Key Points
A few years ago, American colleges and universities abandoned standardized tests such as the SAT/ACT in pursuit of “educational equity,” believing that these tests served as tools for stratification. After the pandemic, we entered an era where tests became optional. However, now more than 1,100 science and engineering professors from the University of California have jointly called for the reinstatement of these tests. They argue that the cancellation of the tests has led to a significant decline in students' foundational skills. For example, one-third of freshmen at Berkeley lack proficiency in calculus, and at UCSD, the proportion of students needing remedial instruction in middle school mathematics has risen from 0.5% to 8.5%, which directly affects the cultivation of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) talents. This issue is not merely educational; it reflects a deeper concern about the lack of high-level talent in areas such as AI and chip technology, where the United States is competing with other countries. The cancellation of tests has made overall evaluations more dependent on resources, with the wealthy having an advantage through summer programs and personalized application essays. China’s large-scale, standardized approach to STEM talent training has prompted the United States to reevaluate the value of a unified, quantitative screening process.
Detailed Analysis
#### 1. The Initial Intent: To Achieve Equity, but a Mistake Was Made
The decision to eliminate the SAT was based on the belief that it favored the wealthy, as affluent families could afford tutoring and test preparation services, while poorer students lacked these resources, resulting in lower test scores. Combined with the racial equity movements of 2020 and the pandemic, colleges shifted to a “test-optional” policy, focusing more on overall evaluations such as leadership skills, community service, extracurricular activities, and strong application essays. This was seen as a more advanced approach, suggesting that success should not be determined solely by test scores.
However, without a standardized benchmark, high school grades began to become inflated. The quality of education varied greatly between schools; some offered AP math courses at a college level, while others awarded high scores arbitrarily. As a result, many students had high GPAs but lacked basic mathematical skills.
#### 2. Science and Engineering Disciplines Are the First to Suffer: Remedial Education Becomes the Norm
STEM subjects were particularly impacted by the test cancellation. While literature classes could be supplemented through discussion, calculus formulas and linear algebra principles remained constant regardless of a student’s background. Professors at the University of California report that classrooms have had to slow down to spend more time on remedial education, with teaching resources being devoted to filling in knowledge gaps. This has led to a longer talent development cycle, as students often need to catch up on foundational skills, which can result in them changing majors or delaying graduation.
#### 3. A Irony: The Wealthy Benefit More from the Test Cancellation
The supposed shift towards “overall evaluations” has actually increased inequality. The wealthy can afford expensive summer programs, hire professional essay writers, and secure recommendations from alumni of top schools. They can also purchase participation in charitable projects to enhance their applications. In contrast, children from lower-income families struggle to participate in competitions or build connections with prestigious institutions. Although the SAT was not perfect, it provided a low-cost, nationwide platform for students to showcase their abilities. Without this, it has become harder for them to stand out.
#### 4. Deep Concerns about Talent Shortages in Technology
The underlying issue is the fear that the United States may not have enough STEM talents to compete globally in fields like AI and chip technology. These industries rely on a large number of highly skilled engineers. For instance, TSMC’s U.S. factories report a shortage of local engineers, and industry forecasts predict a deficit of 60,000 high-skilled workers by 2030. China produces millions of STEM graduates annually, compared to just hundreds of thousands in the United States. While China’s education system is often criticized for being exam-oriented, its standardized approach ensures a steady supply of well-trained engineers. The U.S., on the other hand, is seeing a decline in foundational skills after abandoning quantitative screening methods, which threatens its technological competitiveness.
#### 5. A Sign of Change: Revaluing the Value of Standardized Tests
The University of California and other institutions, such as MIT and Yale, have already reinstated standardized tests. This indicates a shift in thinking: does a country really need a unified, quantitative standard to cultivate engineering talents on a large scale and consistently? The decade-long effort to move away from standardized testing has revealed that without a clear benchmark, even basic skills are not guaranteed. This is not a return to the past; it’s a recognition of the practical needs of talent development in a competitive technological landscape.
In Conclusion
This issue is not just about changes in college admissions policies but also about a reevaluation of how to cultivate useful talents in the context of global technology competition. While equity is important, foundational skills and a sufficient supply of talent are essential for a country to be technologically strong. The United States is reconsidering its approach, recognizing that standardized testing can help ensure that all students have the necessary competencies for success in a competitive tech landscape.