This video is sponsored by CuriosityStream. 
Use the link in the description to watch thousands
of documentaries and, for the same price,
exclusive and ad-free videos from your favorite
creators on Nebula. 
Of the countless companies, industries, and
facets of life affected by the Coronavirus
pandemic, one stands out in particular: college
admissions. 
While airlines can be bailed out, workplaces
can adapt, and the unemployed can expect some
degree of emergency support, for high school
juniors and seniors, 2020 represents not just
one year of lost income or hardship, but,
potentially, a lifetime. 
This and next year’s graduating class have
a lot to gain or lose from changes in college
admissions, and were therefore watching closely
to see how they would respond. 
First, the College Board announced AP tests
would go online. 
After preparing all year for the very specific,
approximately 3-hour format consisting of
both multiple choice and free responses, the
tests would be shortened to 45 minutes, include
only the written section, and also be sent
to teachers. 
While some praised the College Board for adapting
to the circumstances in just eight weeks,
others raised concerns of fairness. 
This year, to prevent cheating, every student
took their exams at the same time. 
Meaning, for example, a student in California
would begin their Computer Science test at
the convenient time of 11 am, while someone
in Tokyo would have to start at 3 am. 
Not all students, of course, have the same
access to technology or a calm, quiet testing
environment. 
Some simply got unlucky - their WiFi stopped
working or their phones froze, and had to
retake it. 
The SAT was in even worse shape. 
In March, as new Coronavirus cases exploded
in the U.S., many testing centers were forced
to close, sometimes on short or no notice. 
The May and then June SATs were canceled,
and preparations are now being made for Fall. 
After first announcing it would also go online,
the College Board has now reversed that decision,
saying it plans on holding one test a month
from August through the end of the year, all
in-person. 
Knowing these circumstances, a number of schools
began dropping their SAT and ACT requirements. 
Dartmouth, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford,
Cornell, all UC-schools, and hundreds of others
have announced they’re becoming ‘test-optional’
for at least the next year. 
But, rather than delaying the course of history,
the Coronavirus seems to be propelling it
forward, five, ten, or even fifteen years. 
What was before unthinkable:
Not going to the movies,
Working from home,
and learning from your laptop,
is now being forced upon us, setting a precedent
that may extend far beyond the virus. 
If employees can work just as effectively
from home, without the cost of running an
office, why not keep doing so? 
And if this batch of students can skip the
SAT, why can’t all? 
The first thing to note is that ‘test-optional’
may not mean what you think it does. 
Many schools require scores from all applicants,
but, on the other end of the spectrum, only
a very small number are ‘test-blind’,
meaning, even if students submit them, they’ll
only be used for things like financial aid,
not admissions. 
Most are somewhere in-between. 
Some schools forgo test scores for students
who meet a certain threshold GPA or class
rank, others vary based on major, and, finally,
about 700 allow students to decide themselves. 
Test-optional doesn’t necessarily mean scores
aren’t important, make admissions easier,
or that you shouldn’t submit them. 
It does mean that if you don’t submit them,
you’ll need other strong qualifications
to stay competitive. 
And here lies the puzzle: If a school believes
standardized tests to be a strong predictor
of college success, one would expect them
to be mandatory. 
On the other hand, if they don’t, you’d
expect schools to not even consider them. 
Why would so many schools allow students to
decide how much information to give them? 
Information which could affect their graduation
rate, academic performance, and, eventually,
endowment. 
A few clues may help answer this question. 
Research shows a few things usually happen
when schools go test-optional:
First, more students apply. 
Naturally, when universities make it easier
to do so, whether by using the Common Application,
or removing requirements like test scores,
more will. 
Of course, schools aren’t accepting more
applicants, which means their acceptance rates
go down, and they appear more selective. 
Second, their average test scores are higher. 
Each student knows all of his or her scores,
and individually decides whether to submit
them based on whether or not they’ll increase
their odds of getting admitted. 
Students with higher scores will choose to
submit them, while those with lower ones will
more likely not, inflating their accepted
school’s average statistics. 
In theory, this shouldn’t matter. 
The College Board explicitly states that SAT
scores should not be used to compare schools. 
And, yet, they are. 
By going test-optional, schools may improve
on college rankings, even if their true average
scores actually decreased. 
7.75% of the US News College Ranking formula,
for example, is based on SAT and ACT scores. 
Although this number is discounted by 15%
if fewer than three-quarters of new students
in a particular year don’t submit scores,
it still leaves plenty of room for schools
to game the system, either by ensuring 75.1%
of students submit, or by making up for the
discount with extremely high average scores. 
Bond-rating agencies also use average scores
to assess a school’s student demand, and
from it, determine creditworthiness. 
Finally, a third effect of going test-optional
is disputed: it may increase diversity. 
The question is: Do standardized tests help
alleviate or amplify inequality? 
Some studies suggest the former, while others
come to the later conclusion. 
In general, admissions officers agree that
the #1 best predictors of college success
are similar high school classes - like AP,
IB, and honors. 
It’s no surprise that arduous semester or
year long courses would better prepare students
for, arduous semester or year long courses,
than, say, a three hour exam by itself. 
The difficulty is that every teacher in every
high school in every city, county, and state
teaches and grades differently. 
It’s also been observed that grades are
inflating over time. 
There are far fewer Cs and Ds and far more
As and Bs today than there were ten years
ago. 
Thus, admissions offices can and should treat
high school GPA as the most important metric,
the College Board argues, but combined with
national, standardized SAT scores to compare
and confirm these numbers between schools. 
How much the SAT adds in predictive power,
researchers disagree, but admissions officers
tend to agree that high grades and low test
scores are better than the reverse. 
And it’s these students who stand to benefit
from test-optional policies. 
They’re disproportionately first-generation
to college, women, low-income, and speak a
second language at home. 
While the SAT may ‘confirm’ high GPAs
for most students, it may make someone in
this group look worse for no good reason. 
For example, they may not have access to test
prep or have the free time to take the exam
several times. 
It’s widely known that household income
is strongly correlated with test performance,
and, for obvious reasons:
Test fees, while insignificant for high-income
households, can be prohibitive for the poor. 
Many low-income students are given two free
SAT exams, but wealthy students are still
more likely to have taken the SAT multiple
times. 
Schools in wealthier areas also provide greater
assistance with the SAT and college admissions,
not to mention private help. 
Many studies suggest test prep leads to an
overall 20-30 point increase on the SAT - sometimes
only by teaching test-taking strategies, rather
than actual material. 
Test coaches, another branch of the SAT economy,
sometimes help their clients apply for learning
disabilities in order to obtain more time
on the exam. 
On the other hand, test-optional policies
place greater emphasis on things like high
school curriculum and extracurricular activities,
both of which are less accessible in some
areas and for some socioeconomic groups. 
Avoiding the SAT, in other words, may simply
introduce a new form of inequality. 
But, while not requiring the SAT and ACT may
or may not help increase diversity, it definitely
helps strengthen other metrics like acceptance
rate, which make schools look more selective. 
It’s impossible to know which of these reasons
truly motivate schools to try test-optional
policies, but it does strongly suggest why
they stay that way. 
Schools now say they’re adjusting this and
next year’s requirements to help ease the
hardships faced by students, which should
come as no surprise at a time when they expect
fewer applicants and greater financial difficulties. 
This year the University of California schools
president made headlines for announcing that
all UC schools will be test-optional for the
next two years, then test-blind for 2 more
after that, and then phase out the SAT and
ACT completely. 
Critics have praised the decision for making
higher education more fair and diverse. 
Except the UC system isn’t abandoning standardized
testing, but creating its own test to use
instead. 
In many ways, it’s reminiscent of 2001,
when the then-UC president delivered a speech
recommending its schools abandon the SAT,
which prompted the College Board to redesign
the test. 
Whether intentional or not, these are negotiations. 
Not-so-subtle reminders to the College Board
that it’s true customers aren’t students,
but schools, and that if it can’t create
the test schools want, they can make it themselves. 
If you’re a student, you’ve probably realized
that learning from home is tough - it requires
more self-discipline, motivation, and study
skills. 
Well, luck for you, it just so happens I and
a bunch of YouTubers have created Nebula,
a new streaming service for the best educational
videos, so you can learn new study habits,
expand your knowledge, and take a break with
exclusive, high-quality Originals - ad-free
and on all your devices. 
We’ve partnered with CuriosityStream so
that when you sign up for their collection
of thousands of high-quality history, science,
and nature documentaries, you also get access
to Nebula at no extra cost. 
Right now, it’s on sale for just $15 a year,
or just under $1.25 a month. 
This is a fantastic deal and all you have
to do is use my link in the description, after
which you’ll get an email with access to
Nebula.