By John Q. Hosedrinker 
More than 600 University of California faculty members are advocating for the reinstatement of standardized testing for STEM applicants, citing significant math preparation gaps among incoming students. Since the suspension of SAT and ACT requirements in 2020, professors report needing to teach middle school math concepts, hindering college-level instruction. Data indicates a notable percentage of first-semester calculus students exhibit deficits, making basic mathematical fluency essential for STEM success. This movement comes as UC leadership considers potential changes to admissions policies, with a system-wide admissions board set to discuss readiness and admissions process improvements.
Read the original article here
The academic community within the University of California system is raising alarm bells over a perceived crisis in fundamental mathematical competency among incoming STEM students. Reports indicate a dramatic surge in first-year students demonstrating math skills significantly below a high school level, with some falling even below middle school benchmarks. This alarming trend has prompted some UC faculty members to strongly advocate for a return to standardized testing, specifically the SAT, as a crucial component in the admissions process for STEM applicants.
The urgency of this situation is underscored by a report from a UC San Diego Academic Senate work group, which allegedly documented a roughly thirty-fold increase between 2020 and 2025 in incoming students whose math skills tested below high school proficiency. The report further highlighted that a staggering 70% of these students were found to be performing below middle school math levels. This suggests a profound disconnect between high school preparation and the demands of collegiate-level STEM coursework, leading to a foundational deficit that hinders academic progress.
Critics of standardized tests often point to their perceived inequity and argue that high school grades are a more accurate predictor of college success. However, this perspective is contested by those observing the current academic landscape. The argument is that high school grades, while seemingly a measure of achievement, can be misleading, especially when the quality of education varies so widely. Without a standardized measure like the SAT, universities are admitting students based on GPAs that may not reflect genuine mathematical understanding or preparedness for rigorous STEM programs.
The consequence of this admissions approach, as articulated by some faculty, is a “fucked” undergraduate baseline in mathematics. The concern is that students are being admitted into competitive STEM fields without possessing the essential mathematical literacy required to succeed. The analogy is drawn to a 10-year-old with straight A’s; their academic success in elementary school doesn’t automatically qualify them for college. Similarly, high GPAs in high school may not translate to readiness for university-level mathematics without a more objective assessment of their actual skills.
The call for the return of SAT testing in STEM admissions stems from a belief that it provides a more reliable indicator of college readiness, particularly in mathematics. The argument is that if students are to pursue demanding STEM degrees, they must demonstrate a certain level of mathematical proficiency that a standardized test can help verify. This is especially relevant when considering that only a fraction of 11th graders in some states are performing at or above their grade level in math, indicating a broader societal issue that admissions processes should acknowledge.
The current system, which often relies solely on GPAs, is seen by some as inadequate in identifying students truly equipped for STEM. It’s questioned whether students are genuinely prepared or simply managed to pass high school math courses without deep comprehension. The experience of many, even those with strong high school math backgrounds, includes placement tests and remedial courses upon entering college, suggesting that current admission metrics are not effectively filtering for preparedness.
Furthermore, the rise of AI tools that can solve complex math problems is raising new concerns. While these tools can be helpful aids, there’s a worry that students are becoming reliant on them without grasping the underlying mathematical principles. This reliance, coupled with potential grade inflation and the removal of standardized tests, creates a fertile ground for students entering college with a superficial understanding of mathematics, ill-equipped for the challenges ahead.
The experience of educators, such as a computer science instructor whose students struggle with basic arithmetic, paints a grim picture of declining mathematical skills. The demoralization of trying to teach programming to students lacking fundamental math and critical thinking abilities highlights the systemic failures. The sentiment is that while education spending may be high, the outcomes are increasingly dire, necessitating significant changes.
Some argue that focusing solely on bringing back the SAT might be missing a larger point. They suggest that instead of solely relying on a test to filter students, universities should bolster tutoring, guidance, and support systems to help unprepared students improve. However, others counter that while support is important, the fundamental issue is ensuring students have the prerequisite skills for collegiate-level work in the first place, and that a standardized test is a practical way to gauge this.
The debate also touches upon the purpose of higher education – whether it should focus on creating practitioners or researchers. Some believe that a return to professors with real-world experience would foster a more applied approach to learning, but this is seen as a separate issue from the immediate concern of mathematical competency.
The experiences of students educated in different systems, such as France, where math curricula are perceived as more rigorous, further fuel the discussion. Students passing out of most math classes in American universities, having already covered the material in their earlier education, point to a potential disparity in educational standards.
Ultimately, the demand for the return of the SAT for STEM applicants is rooted in a deep concern for the quality of mathematical education and preparedness within the University of California system. The perceived “severe” math deficits among incoming students suggest that current admission practices are not adequately ensuring that students are ready for the rigor of STEM fields, leading to a cycle of remediation and potential academic failure. The SAT, while imperfect, is seen by many faculty as a necessary tool to re-establish a baseline of mathematical competence and uphold academic standards.