The U. California Regents’ Test-Blind Decision (February 2024)

College admission test-optional policies can affect test development firms’ sales because some proportion of students will avoid the tests if they’re only applying to test-optional schools, and they judge from experience or practice testing that they will score poorly. With a test-blind policy, a college does not even consider admission test scores. Especially in a large state like California, the many students applying only to state colleges lack any incentive to take the tests.

In 2020-2021, the Regents of the University of California System of ten campuses voted unanimously to adopt a test-blind policy despite the recommendation to continue admission test use of an exhaustively thorough study by UC faculty. How did this happen? Did the Regents consider the faculty study? Did the Regents believe admission testing critics’ arguments – admission tests are racist, correlated only with socioeconomic status, etc.?

Regardless of what the U. Cal Regents did, what should testing scholars do now? The traditional approach of writing even-handed, deeply empirical scientific studies seemed to have no effect whatsoever in California. What led to these outcomes in CA and will empirical research have any influence in similar debates about admissions testing across higher education? Is California an exception or is it, as many have long argued, a trendsetter? What data do we have about the efficacy of test optional policies and their impact on diversity, fairness, and academic quality of admitted classes?

Panelists:

• Wayne Camara, LSAC
• Wenyuan Wu, Californians for Equal Rights Foundation
• Richard Phelps, Nonpartisan Education Group