In case anyone missed it while hitting refresh on the Yale-Dartmouth thread, the University of Michigan, THE World University Ranking #23 (#14 US), is now permanently test-optional
https://record.umich.edu/articles/u-m-formally-adopts-test-optional-admissions-policy/
Itâs interesting (but not surprising) that schools are creating different policies, ones that match their internally generated data, but it seems they are also interpreting data outside their institution in different ways.
âTo make the recommendation, the committee analyzed the most recent U-M data on test-flexible admissions and reviewed all of the latest national research,â said committee member Michael Bastedo, associate dean of research and graduate studies, and professor of education in the Marsal Family School of Education. âWe concluded that a test-optional policy was, at this time, the best reflection of how to ensure access and fairness to a diverse range of U-M applicants.â
Itâs also noteworthy that Michigan wonât consider other tests, like AP and IB scores, in the admissions process any longer.
The test optional policy gives prospective students the choice to submit SAT or ACT scores when applying, starting in winter 2025. But it eliminates other forms of testing from consideration.
All signs are pointing to Caltech going permanently test-blind, and it will be great fun seeing how people dismiss that or contort it to fit their priors.
I do think public universities have a very different mission than private ones. Just as UT has an admission policy to ensure broad representation across the state, regardless of preparation level.
I canât imagine anyone caring that much about 220 of the worldâs top math minds at Caltech, a niche school. Anyone who applies and attends without proper preparation will very quickly regret it.
A lot of people are dismissing data that doesnât fit their priors, not just the pro-test crowd.
In fact Iâd wonder how such a person could slip through their admissions process!
BTW Iâm curious about schools that say something is âpermanent.â Does that mean theyâre ceasing to look at or perform any sort of longitudinal studies on this, whether at UMich or elsewhere? Like if itâs permanent, why continue to study it?
If theyâre still looking at it, then doesnât that say theyâre open to reversing this? Which means itâs not permanent.
In which case is the choice to use the word âpermanentâ somewhat of a play to optics vs saying something like âat least for the next X yearsâ or the like?
I wouldnât describe it as just optics, but yes I think that just means they have no specific plans to re-evaluate any time in the foreseeable future.
Interesting. My d applied test optional this year, I figured she would be at a disadvantage even though they claim itâs not. Maybe it wonât hurt as much as I thought 
when your lowest quartile is an 800 Math, not sure what value there is for Caltech.
I think it is inaccurate to use the word âPermanentlyâ. They were clear in this press release and in the email we received that it was officially going into effect, but they left room to reverse that decision.
âThe shift to test-optional will begin with the 2025 application cycle. The university will monitor the standardized testing policy on an ongoing basis.â
They are not locking themselves into this position in perpetuity - but it does alleviate anxiety about next year.
âPermanentâ really means until they decide to change the policy, but with no indication that they will consider changing the policy at any pre-determined time in the future (and the default action is to leave it the way it is). In contrast, âfor the next two admission cyclesâ means that they have a deadline to consider what policy they will use after the next two admission cycles.
I really wish âindefinitelyâ was a more popular word, but apparently it causes way more confusion than it resolves.
I donât see this as a huge revelation, actually. More like Michigan Speak. Itâs hard to unsee a ACT of 34.
About 7 years ago or so there was this hubbub if Michigan super scored. They said no but⊠They would look at your top scores of either the Act or Sat and use that. Lol. Now they say they doâŠ
Most schools are currently doing 3-5 year studies since really the pandemic that went test optional or some version of that. They are following the students and creating metrics for outcomes. Evidently, Michiganâs outcomes with those students must be encouraging. I am surprised about the IB though but again, itâs hard not to see someone going to an IB school and the rigor it provides. The AOs arenât going to automatically discount schools known for rigor in their communities. I do hope it gets students to apply that maybe wouldnât due to their scores. But I emphasize⊠Michigan is a very difficult school. Especially first semester /year even for the best students. So if the score isnât matching their performance, I would look further into the why.
IB kids only have 1 or 2 scores before they apply to colleges, so I donât think using them or not really changes things much. My oldest had 2 scores after junior year and my next only has 1. Plus, they arenât going to be in math, English or science most likely, so they donât really show as much as an SAT would. I can see why they didnât find submitting IB scores in lieu of SAT makes sense.
â regardless of preparation levelâ
Is it really regardless of preparation level? That seems pretty extreme. They donât even ask for grades?
Do they use a similar approach with their sports scholarships? Faculty hiring?
Top 6% in class rank of any accredited Texas high school has guaranteed admission to flagship ( top 10% to other public colleges). Regardless of preparation level. It does largely result in the desired racial, ethnic, geographic and SES diversity mix, and is transparent.
It simply acknowledges that living in the UP or Flint doesnât provide the same educational opportunities as living in AA or Grosse Pointe, so that if in your graduating class of 34 only 9 reach precalculus senior year and youâre one of only 2 with an A, you have what it takes to succeed at Michigan, even if in another HS itâd be wholly unremarkable.
But not âany given majorâ correct? I think academic strength is still looked at when accepting into specific majors.
Any major if the student has taken precalculus and gotten an A. (Iâm not sure what you mean wrt majors that would be impacted.)
Academic strength would be considered topnotch since this would likely be one of the top 2 or 3 science students at their HS.
They may have to enroll in Math 105 (precalculus&data) or 110 (after the 1st midterm, students who took precalculus in HS and are struggling in the 1st semester calculus course as per 1st grades take this review course which is a condensed version of 105. The basic idea is that the students have what it takes even if their HS didnât provide what was needed). If they stop with a regular Algebra2 then most STEM majors are less likely or most probably closed off though, since even 105 requires 3 to 4 years of HS math including Algebra2 w/Trigonometry.
I wasnât sure. What I have understood (maybe incorrectly) from UT discussions is that you are guaranteed acceptance, but not guaranteed your major. And was thinking the same here.