The University of California is facing a growing dispute over how to measure incoming students’ quantitative preparation. More than 600 UC faculty members, spearheaded by mathematicians at UC Berkeley, have signed an open letter asking the system to reinstate the SAT or ACT mathematics requirement for applicants to STEM majors beginning with the fall 2027 admissions cycle. The signatories argue that several years of test-optional admissions have produced an alarming rise in underprepared students, forcing professors to remediate basic arithmetic and middle-school topics instead of building on advanced material.
The petition was addressed to the UC Regents, the UC Office of the President, and Academic Senate leadership, and it arrives as the UC Academic Senate’s Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools prepares to review system-wide admissions policy. The faculty contend that current measures—relying heavily on high-school GPA and application materials—no longer provide consistent signals of readiness in an era of grade inflation and AI-influenced essays.
Evidence behind the appeal
Signers cite institutional studies that document substantial declines in mathematical preparedness. A UC San Diego workgroup report highlighted a dramatic rise in incoming students whose skills fall below expected high-school levels, with the most severe group performing below middle-school standards. On multiple campuses, diagnostic testing found that a significant share of first-term calculus students lacked foundational fluency. Faculty say these patterns are not isolated: statewide assessment data show that a minority of California 11th graders meet mathematical standards, and classroom diagnostics echo those shortcomings.
What the numbers suggest
The letter presents specific findings: a near thirtyfold increase in students below high-school math proficiency over a five-year span, and a persistent pattern where 20–30% of tested Berkeley calculus entrants demonstrate pronounced preparation deficits. Faculty interpret this not simply as a skills problem but as a structural mismatch between admissions criteria and the realities of classroom readiness—one that creates polarized cohorts and strains instructional resources.
Policy recommendations from faculty
The open letter lays out several concrete requests. First, signatories ask for the reinstatement of SAT/ACT mathematics requirements for applicants to quantitatively intensive majors, effective with fall 2027. Second, they demand formal STEM faculty oversight over readiness standards and admissions practices that directly affect those programs. Third, they urge institutional accountability: testing admissions criteria against actual student outcomes and revising those criteria when they fail to predict success.
Rationale for restoring standardized measures
Faculty stress that the goal of testing is not to gatekeep but to provide a common, objective baseline: a way to confirm that applicants possess core quantitative fluency before entering demanding coursework. According to the letter, standardized math scores can also surface high-potential students from under-resourced schools who lack opportunities to take advanced courses, thereby supporting equitable placement rather than obscuring need.
Implications for students and the system
Signatories warn that ignoring foundational readiness transfers the burden of remediation into college classrooms, which can lengthen time-to-degree, depress graduation rates, and reduce the number who complete STEM majors. They contend this outcome undermines the University of California’s mission to serve California’s diverse population and to supply a pipeline of well-prepared STEM professionals. With peer institutions increasingly returning to standardized testing, faculty argue that UC risks falling out of step with national norms for evaluating mathematical preparation.
Equity and accountability concerns
The letter reframes testing as an equity tool: an objective metric helps identify where support is required rather than concealing disparities behind inflated grades. Faculty emphasize that responsible admissions policy should include both reliable measures of basic skills and mechanisms for oversight so that decisions align with actual student performance and learning outcomes.
As the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools prepares to discuss admissions changes, the UC system faces a choice about how to balance access with preparation. The faculty coalition recommends bringing back objective benchmarks while expanding faculty authority to define and monitor the standards that govern entry into STEM majors—an approach they say will protect students and preserve the value of a UC STEM degree.