Elite College Admissions: SAT-Only Policy Could Increase Lower-Income Representation by 8.8 Percentage Points

A recent analysis suggests that a shift to SAT-only admissions at elite colleges could significantly boost representation from lower-income brackets, challenging the efficacy of "holistic review" and test-optional policies. Garry Tan, CEO of Y Combinator, articulated this perspective, stating that if elite colleges "only used SAT to admit," the share of admits from the top 1% income bracket would fall from 15.8% to 9.9%, while representation from those earning under $200,000 would rise by 8.8%, with no reduction in post-college outcomes.

Tan criticized current admissions practices, asserting via social media, > "It's 'holistic review' and 'ban SAT' policy that allows the most wealthy and powerful to virtue signal while getting an edge." This viewpoint aligns with his previous critiques of "holistic" admissions, which he has described as "hostile and racist," citing cases like Stanley Zhong, an 18-year-old coding prodigy reportedly rejected by 16 colleges despite being hired by Google at a PhD-level role.

A comprehensive study by economists Raj Chetty, David Deming, and John Friedman of Opportunity Insights, published as an NBER working paper, underpins some of Tan's claims. Their research found that factors disproportionately favoring high-income applicants at Ivy-Plus colleges—namely legacy preferences, non-academic ratings, and athletic recruitment—are either uncorrelated or negatively correlated with post-college success. Conversely, SAT/ACT scores and academic credentials were found to be highly predictive of future outcomes.

The Opportunity Insights study specifically modeled that eliminating these advantages for high-income families could increase the share of students from the bottom 95% of the parental income distribution by 8.8 percentage points. This suggests that the current "holistic" approach, while aiming for broader considerations, may inadvertently perpetuate socioeconomic disparities by favoring non-academic criteria often more accessible to affluent applicants.

However, the debate surrounding standardized tests and college admissions remains complex. Some proponents of test-optional policies argue that SAT scores are highly correlated with wealth, reflecting existing educational inequalities rather than inherent ability. For instance, a Harvard Gazette article discussing the Opportunity Insights study noted that children from the top 1% income are 13 times more likely to score 1300 or higher on the SAT than those from the lowest 20%.

Despite these concerns, institutions like MIT have reinstated SAT requirements, with their 2023-2024 freshman class reportedly being their most socioeconomically diverse. This outcome supports the argument that standardized tests can serve as a valuable tool for identifying academically talented students from disadvantaged backgrounds, who might otherwise be overlooked in a purely holistic review process that may favor applicants with extensive, often costly, extracurricular and essay-writing support. The ongoing discourse highlights the challenge of balancing meritocratic principles with diversity goals in elite higher education.