Reinstating the SAT is a step backwards for the University of California, and it moves away from its commitment to equitable access, and toward a system that rewards privilege over potential. In July 2026, UC STEM faculty members, from across nine UC campuses, organized a petition to the UC Regents to reinstate SAT and ACT admission requirements after June 2027. The SAT has been marketed as a measure of academic readiness, but more often than not, it reflects the resources accessible to a student, rather than their true ability or work ethic. The SAT is inherently biased toward students with more privilege, and the UC system should not be focused on creating more barriers to education, but rather investing in programs that will support existing and future students towards success.
For many students, success on the SAT comes with a price tag. Families with greater financial means can afford private tutors, expensive test- prep courses, practice exams, and repeated testing until they achieve a competitive score. Students from lower-income backgrounds often do not have the same opportunities. They may work after school, care for family members, lack reliable transportation to testing centers, or be unable to pay the registration fees and additional costs associated with preparing for the exam. In this sense, the SAT functions as a pay-to-win system, where financial resources become a significant advantage in the admissions process.
The UC system serves one of the most diverse student populations in the nation and was founded on the principle that talent exists in every community, regardless of income or ZIP code. Returning to a standardized test that disproportionately benefits wealthier applicants risks undermining that mission. Students should be evaluated on years of academic achievement, leadership, resilience, and contributions to their communities, not on a single Saturday morning exam that often measures access to opportunity as much as academic ability.
Rather than asking why undergraduate students may be struggling academically, the conversation too often shifts toward placing blame on students themselves. Students can no longer just focus on their education when they face the high cost of living in California and may have to choose between their academic success and being able to afford their rent. The University of California’s own data shows that 48 percent of UC undergraduates reported experiencing food insecurity in 2024. At the same time, the UC has acknowledged growing student needs and warned that budget cuts are forcing reductions to student support services. We cannot claim to care about student success while reducing the resources that help students thrive.
Now, there exists an opportunity to uplift the current education offered to enrolled students in the UC system — not barring potential students from participating in public institutions. As the cost of a UC education continues to rise annually, the education itself must improve for existing and future students. It is unfair to put the burden of achievement entirely on students when they continue to lose access to resources meant to help them succeed. If the university recognizes that today’s students need more support to succeed, the solution should be investing in those supports, not reinstating a standardized test that creates another barrier to admission.
