Last week, we conducted a--well, not a survey, exactly--of high school and independent counselors, asking them what they thought about test-optional and test-free admission policies. This is more a testing of the waters of those interested enough and motivated enough to respond. So, before the fans of tests (who can do their own testing of the water at any time, of course), point this out, file this under "interesting, but not definitive." It might drive discussions, but it won't make a decision for us. And it shouldn't for you, either. We received about 440 responses, mostly responding to an email we sent to high school counselors across the country. Those responses came from all over, including some from schools that had probably never sent an applicant, let alone an enrolling student to OSU; but we can't be sure because the survey was anonymous. But we received almost as many responses from Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey as we did from Oregon, int
If you want a definitive answer, you can stop now. As Mark Twain allegedly said, "I was gratified to be able to give an answer right away. I said I didn't know." However, critics of test optional like to trot out this study from 2014 , suggesting test-optional policies do not increase diversity. There are a couple of problems with using that paper to prop up this argument, however: First, the study included about 200 liberal arts colleges, and nowhere does it suggest that the conclusions can be generalized, or even that the results are reflective of reality every where else. Second, the study explicitly states that the SAT sorts students by social class, not just academic ability. You can't cite the outcomes without including lines like, "Despite the clear relationship between privilege and standardized test performance..." but somehow test lovers overlook that. Finally, admissions, opportunity, culture, and policy are complex. The belief that waving a