In Sudden Reversal, Harvard To Require Standardized Testing for Next Admissions Cycle


Universities should work with right-leaning critics who want to strengthen academia’s distinctive culture, Jenna Silber Storey and Benjamin Storey write.

By Elyse C. Goncalves and Matan H. Josephy, Crimson Staff Writers

The Harvard Crimson

April 11, 2024


Updated April 11, 2024, at 3:25 p.m.

Harvard College will reinstate its standardized testing requirement in admissions beginning with the Class of 2029, a surprise reversal that could leave some students scrambling to take SAT or ACT tests ahead of application deadlines in the fall.


The decision comes in the face of Harvard’s previous commitments to remain test-optional through the admitted Class of 2030, a policy that was first instituted during the pandemic.


Harvard had faced mounting criticism from both academics and admissions experts for continuing its test-optional policies, even as its peer institutions returned to requiring standardized tests. In recent weeks, Yale, Dartmouth, and Brown have announced returns to required testing.


All applicants to the Class of 2029 — due to apply in the fall and winter of 2024 — will be required to submit SAT or ACT scores, barring specific cases in which they may be unable to access such exams, according to the College’s announcement. In such cases, scores from exams such as Advanced Placement or the International Baccalaureate will be accepted as substitutes.


Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences Hopi E. Hoekstra wrote in a statement that “standardized tests are a means for all students, regardless of their background and life experience, to provide information that is predictive of success in college and beyond.”


“More information, especially such strongly predictive information, is valuable for identifying talent from across the socioeconomic range,” she added. “With this change, we hope to strengthen our ability to identify these promising students.”


The majority of undergraduates entering Harvard in the past four years have submitted standardized test scores, according to the release, which did not specify an exact percentage.

Harvard officials have recently hedged on whether the College would reinstate its testing requirement. In early March, Hoekstra told The Crimson that Harvard was “in the midst of analyzing” its policy.


Harvard College Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid William R. Fitzsimmons ’67 said in an interview in late March that the College had “nothing new to report” on whether its testing policy through the admitted Class of 2030 would be changing.


In its press release, Harvard referenced a study from Harvard-affiliated initiative Opportunity Insights, led by Brown University economist John N. Friedman ’02 and Harvard economists Raj Chetty ’00 and David J. Deming, which found that SAT scores are a particularly strong predictor of college success – much more so than a student’s high school grade point average.


Some experts also said that a return to requiring standardized test scores could help universities like Harvard increase the racial and socioeconomic diversity of its student body.

Deming, a finalist to serve as dean of the Harvard Kennedy School, wrote in a statement that the requirement of standardized test scores provides the “fairest admissions policy for disadvantaged applicants.”


“Not everyone can hire an expensive college coach to help them craft a personal essay. But everyone has the chance to ace the SAT or the ACT,” Deming wrote.


When Yale and Dartmouth reinstated their testing policies, both institutions referenced the predictive power of standardized testing as a key incentive for its return as a mandatory component of the admissions process.


Still, the College’s announcement — made exactly two weeks after it released admissions decisions for the incoming Class of 2028 — has exposed it to criticism.


The Generational African American Students Association, a student organization at Harvard, posted a statement on Instagram Thursday afternoon blasting the College’s return to required testing.


The policy change “strikes at the very heart of the progress made toward achieving true equal opportunity within higher education institutions such as Harvard,” the group wrote.


“This decision also compounds the challenges already faced by low-income and minority students in the wake of affirmative action being overruled,” they added.


A College spokesperson declined to comment on the criticism of the policy reversal.


Harvard’s reversal of its commitment to stay test-optional through the next two admissions cycles came with little warning to applicants for the Class of 2029, who have six sittings of the ACT and the SAT left before Harvard’s regular decision application deadline on Jan. 1 — and even fewer before its early action deadline of Nov. 1.


https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/11/harvard-sat-act-admissions-requirement/



December 10, 2025
Written by John Craig December 10, 2025 On October 27, the Manhattan Institution’s City Journal published a major, breakthrough analysis of the performance of 100 prominent US (and one Canadian) universities and colleges, “Introducing the City Journal College Rankings,” For the first time, this new performance system includes data on measures (68 in all) like freedom of expression, viewpoint diversity tolerance, quality of instruction, investment payoff, and campus politicization that are not considered in the other major higher ed ranking systems. How did Davidson measure up in City Journal’s performance assessment? On a scale of one (bottom) to five (top) stars , Davidson is among the 63 schools that received 2 stars. Schools that, according to City Journal, have “Mostly average to below-average scores in all categories with no particularly noteworthy strengths. Significant, focused policy changes are needed at these schools.” (Full rankings available here College Rankings | Rankings ) To summarize the methodology, the City Journal team selected 100 schools that are highly touted by other ranking systems, widely known to the American public, and/or of high regional importance. The researchers gathered data on 68 variables across 21 categories covering four major aspects of on- and off-campus life. The Educational Experience categories were Faculty Ideological Pluralism, Faculty Teaching Quality, Faculty Research Quality, Faculty Speech Climate, Curricular Rigor, and Heterodox Infrastructure; the Leadership Quality categories were Commitment to Meritocracy, Support for Free Speech, and Resistance to Politicization; the Outcomes categories were Quality of Alumni Network, Value Added to Career, and Value Added to Education; and the Student Experience categories were Student Ideological Pluralism, Student Free Speech, Student Political Tolerance, Student Social Life, Student Classroom Experience, Campus ROTC, Student Community Life, and Jewish Campus Climate. No other higher ed ranking system includes as many variables. (Read more about methodology at College Rankings | Methods ) The data included publicly available information from sources such as the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the Department of Education’s College Scorecard, and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s College Free Speech Rankings. The researchers also developed original measures for the project, such as the ideological balance of student political organizations and the partisan makeup of faculty campaign contributions. Each variable was coded so that higher values mean better performance and was weighted to reflect relative importance. For example, student ideological pluralism (as measured by self-reported student ideology and the left-right balance of student organizations) accounts for 5 percent of a school’s score while City Journal’s estimate of how many years it will take the typical student to recoup their educational investment to attend a given college accounts for 12.5 percent. A school’s overall score is the sum of points across the 21 categories, with the top possible score being 100. While the assessment system is for the most part hard-data-based, it has, like other ranking systems, subjective elements—like the weighing system. So methodological challenges will come and will doubtlessly lead to improvements the next time around. That said, the methodology strikes me as defensible and a marked improvement over that of other popular rating systems. I will conclude with some comments on the findings. Note that the Average score (out of 100) for the 100 institutions is 46 and the median score is 45.73—so overall, this is not a “high performance” group of institutions. No institution receives a 5-Star rating, and only two receive a 4-Star rating (University of Florida and University of Texas at Austin). Only 11 schools receive a 3-Star rating—Having “Mixed results across the four categories, showing strengths in some and weakness in others. These schools typically have several clear paths to improvement.” Because assessment scores are generally low and tightly clustered in the middle, the rankings by score are misleading: Davidson, at 51.16 with a rank of 25, looks to be in the top quartile (between Princeton and Georgetown), but in fact gets just a 2-Star assessment
November 11, 2025
Report from Ivy League school finds rampant grade inflation, but students complain administration is moving goal posts
October 30, 2025
Decades of big spending, new federal funding cuts and a changing view of higher education created a perfect storm; ‘Spending Your Tuition On Its Mistakes’
Show More