The University of California Board of Regents heard presentations on the SAT on Wednesday, specifically on whether it should be re-introduced into freshman admissions. I found the below excerpt from one presentation illuminating: "the statistical power of tests in predicting outcomes does not address whether UC ought to consider expected college success when deciding which students to admit, or to what extent we should" So, it's clear the debate is not centered on whether the SAT predicts college success -- the presenter says so himself. The heart of the debate is this: a UC education is a path to upward mobility, and the anti-SAT faction believe that this golden ticket should be given to those who would benefit from it the most, especially those who they feel have been harmed by society in the past as a form of restorative justice. If you hold this viewpoint, the increased failure rates in intro math classes and the surge in student unpreparedness are irrelevant.

California state senators are now weighing in, asking the University of California to bring the SAT/ACT back as soon as possible. @SenOchoaBogh @SenatorChoi @SenRogerNiello Letter 1: “… students entering the University of California are not prepared for the rigorous coursework that is required to complete their degrees… we call upon the Board of Regents to move quickly towards reinstatement without delay” 1/3

"if UC chooses to resist (or appears to resist) the pressures to change the current admissions procedures, outside political forces might compel change, and mandated reforms likely would be less informed, less effective, and more prone to produce unexpected and undesired outcomes than reforms produced within the University" -- UC Standardized Testing Task Force Report, Jan 2020 Who were these mysterious "outside political forces"? And how could they "compel change" when UC's autonomy is written into the CA State Constitution?🤔