Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

SAT

The SAT is a developed and administered by the to assess high school students' readiness for college-level work, primarily used by colleges and universities in undergraduate admissions decisions. First administered in 1926 as an aptitude measure derived from earlier testing efforts, it has evolved to evaluate evidence-based reading and writing skills alongside mathematical reasoning through two main sections scored on a 200-800 scale each, yielding a total score range of 400-1600. The test, now delivered digitally with adaptive modules for efficiency, is taken by over 1.9 million students annually and correlates empirically with first-year college grade point average, enhancing predictive accuracy by approximately 15% when combined with high school grades. Despite persistent controversies over its susceptibility to coaching, socioeconomic disparities in average scores, and debates regarding cultural or racial biases in question design, longitudinal validity studies affirm its utility in forecasting academic performance across diverse applicant pools, underscoring its role in meritocratic selection amid alternatives like the .

Purpose and Function

Overview of the SAT

The SAT is a developed and administered by the , a founded in to expand access to . Primarily used for undergraduate admissions in the United States, it evaluates high school students' proficiency in reading, writing, and mathematics—skills deemed essential for college-level coursework and career readiness. The test provides admissions officers with a consistent, objective measure to assess applicants' academic potential alongside high school grades, extracurriculars, and other factors, with research indicating moderate for first-year college GPA (correlations around 0.3-0.5) and degree completion. First administered on June 23, 1926, to approximately 8,000 high school students, originated as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, adapted from World War I-era intelligence tests to gauge innate cognitive abilities for merit-based scholarships at elite institutions like Harvard and Yale. Early versions emphasized reasoning over rote knowledge, but revisions—such as the 1990s shift to include writing and the 2016 redesign to align more closely with standards—have pivoted toward assessing learned competencies amid criticisms of cultural bias and coaching effects. By the 2020s, average scores had declined from historical highs (e.g., verbal around 500 in the to 520 in 2023), prompting debates on factors like educational quality and test-prep disparities. As of 2024, has transitioned to a fully format delivered via the College Board's app on laptops or tablets, reducing testing time to about 2 hours and 14 minutes while introducing adaptive : the difficulty of the second in each adjusts based on first- performance to enhance precision and security. Scores range from 400 to 1600 (200-800 per ), with no penalty for guessing and a built-in for math. Over 1.9 million students took in the 2023-2024 cycle, though participation has fluctuated with test-optional policies adopted by many universities post-COVID-19, raising questions about its enduring role in identifying high-potential candidates from varied socioeconomic backgrounds.

Role in College Admissions and Merit-Based Selection

The SAT functions as a key tool in college admissions to assess applicants' academic preparedness and cognitive abilities, enabling institutions to predict postsecondary performance and prioritize merit-based criteria over subjective evaluations. Empirical studies demonstrate that SAT scores correlate moderately to strongly with first-year college grade-point average (GPA), typically yielding validity coefficients of 0.44 to 0.55 when combined with high school GPA, outperforming high school GPA alone in predictive accuracy. This predictive power extends beyond the first year, maintaining associations with cumulative GPA through subsequent college years, as well as with retention rates and graduation outcomes. In processes, SAT scores provide an objective benchmark for identifying high-potential students, particularly useful for allocating scholarships and admission to competitive programs where drive success. For instance, among applicants with comparable high school grades, higher SAT scores independently forecast superior academic performance at selective institutions, adding incremental validity not captured by transcripts alone. Recent analyses of the digital SAT format confirm enhanced predictive utility, explaining 38% more variance in college outcomes than high school GPA in isolation. Institutions leveraging SAT data in holistic reviews can thus better align admissions with evidence of future achievement, mitigating inconsistencies in high school grading standards that have inflated across regions and demographics. Test-optional policies, expanded during the and affecting over 1,900 U.S. colleges by 2023, have disrupted this merit-oriented role by allowing strategic non-submission of scores, often disadvantaging high-achieving students from underrepresented socioeconomic backgrounds who forgo submitting strong results amid opaque guidelines. Data from these policies show increased application volumes and marginal gains in underrepresented minority enrollment—such as a 3.8 rise in enrollees in fall 2021 cohorts—but limited evidence of improved academic outcomes or sustained , with submitted scores still outperforming non-submitted ones in forecasting success. Critics in academic circles, often prioritizing equity narratives over empirical validity, have questioned SAT utility despite consistent research affirming its cross-group predictive strength, including for low-income and minority test-takers when preparation access is controlled. As selective admissions shift post-2023 restrictions on race-conscious practices, reinstating SAT requirements has gained traction for fostering color-blind merit selection grounded in verifiable .

Test Format and Content

Structure of the Digital SAT

The Digital SAT consists of two main sections—Reading and Writing and —each divided into two adaptive modules, for a total of 98 questions completed in 2 hours and 14 minutes, excluding a 10-minute break between sections. The test is administered exclusively on digital devices provided at test centers or via the app for school-day testing, with adaptive design determining the difficulty of the second module based on performance in the first. This format, fully implemented for U.S. students starting March 2024, reduces overall length from the prior paper-based version while maintaining content coverage in , writing skills, and quantitative reasoning. The Reading and Writing section allocates 64 minutes for 54 multiple-choice questions, with 27 questions per module and 32 minutes allotted to each. Passages are concise, ranging from 25 to 150 words, drawn from , history, , and science, followed by a single question testing domains such as information and ideas (reading for central ideas, details, and inferences), craft and (vocabulary, text purpose, and organization), and expression of ideas or conventions (, , and effective communication). Questions emphasize skill application over isolated knowledge, with no separate subscores for reading versus writing. The section provides 70 minutes for 44 questions, split evenly into 22 questions per module with 35 minutes each, and permits use throughout via an embedded . Approximately 75% of questions are multiple-choice, while 25% require student-produced responses entered numerically without options. Content focuses on (linear equations, systems, and inequalities), advanced math (nonlinear equations, equivalents, and functions), problem-solving and data analysis (ratios, percentages, statistics, and probability), and / (lines, shapes, and trig ratios), aligned with high school curricula.
SectionModulesTime per ModuleQuestions per ModuleTotal TimeTotal QuestionsQuestion Types
Reading and Writing232 minutes2764 minutes54Multiple-choice only
Mathematics235 minutes2270 minutes44~75% multiple-choice; ~25% student-produced responses
Adaptivity operates independently per section: strong performance in Module 1 yields a harder Module 2 with greater score potential, while weaker performance results in easier questions but a capped ceiling; overall section scores (200–800 each) derive from total correct answers equated to the scale, unaffected by unanswered questions due to no guessing penalty. This structure prioritizes efficiency and equity in delivery, though empirical data on score comparability to the legacy SAT remains under review by the College Board.

Reading and Writing Module

The Reading and Writing section of the digital SAT consists of two modules, each with 27 multiple-choice questions (25 operational and 2 pretest) to be completed in 32 minutes, for a total of 54 questions over 64 minutes. The section evaluates foundational literacy skills for college and career success, including , , reasoning, revision, and editing of texts. Unlike prior versions of the SAT, it features no extended reading passages; instead, each question draws from a concise passage (25–150 words) or pair of passages sourced from , /, , or , with topics reflecting diverse global and U.S. contexts. The test employs a multistage adaptive , where performance on the first determines the difficulty of : strong results yield harder questions, while weaker performance results in easier ones, enabling more precise ability measurement within the section's 200–800 score scale. Questions are —meaning one question per passage—and grouped by content domain within each , progressing from least to most difficult to support efficient pacing. Content spans four domains, weighted as follows:
DomainApproximate PercentageQuestion RangeKey Skills Tested
Craft and Structure28%13–15Words in context; text structure and purpose; cross-text connections; rhetorical evaluation and .
Information and Ideas26%12–14Central ideas and details; command of (textual or quantitative via ); inferences and textual .
Standard English Conventions26%11–15Sentence boundaries and form; usage and punctuation conventions.
Expression of Ideas20%8–12Rhetorical ; transitions for logical progression and .
These domains emphasize practical application over rote memorization, with questions requiring test-takers to interpret quantitative elements like charts alongside text where relevant. The section's design prioritizes brevity and focus, allowing approximately 1.2 minutes per question, and integrates real-world texts to assess nuanced understanding without cultural or ideological bias in passage selection.

Mathematics Module

The Mathematics module of the digital SAT evaluates quantitative reasoning and problem-solving skills essential for college-level , comprising two adaptive modules totaling 44 questions administered over 70 minutes, with each module featuring 22 questions and 35 minutes of testing time. The module employs a multistage adaptive design, where performance on the first module determines the difficulty level of the second module: strong performance yields harder questions, while weaker performance results in easier ones, though all questions contribute equally to the final score scaled from 200 to 800. Within each module, questions increase progressively in difficulty to optimize assessment of a test-taker's ability range. Questions span four content domains, weighted as follows: (35%), Advanced Math (35%), Problem-Solving and (15%), and and (15%), emphasizing real-world applications over rote memorization. focuses on linear equations in one or two variables, linear functions, linear inequalities, and systems of linear equations or inequalities, testing skills like solving for unknowns and interpreting slopes or intercepts. Advanced Math covers nonlinear equations, including quadratics, polynomials, exponentials, and rational or radical expressions, with emphasis on equivalent forms, rewriting expressions, and understanding functions' behavior. Problem-Solving and includes ratios, rates, percentages, unit conversions, scatterplots, inferential statistics, and probability, requiring interpretation of quantitative and modeling scenarios such as growth or distributions. and addresses area, perimeter, surface area, , lines, , triangles, right triangles, circles, and basic trigonometric ratios like sine, cosine, and in non-right triangles. Roughly 75% of questions are multiple-choice with four answer options, while 25% are student-produced responses, where test-takers enter numerical answers—including fractions, decimals, or coordinates—into an on-screen grid without simplifying radicals or using mixed numbers. Unlike prior paper-based versions, the entire permits use, with a built-in accessible via the testing interface, supporting functions like , , and symbolic manipulation to handle computations efficiently. This tool, available from the outset, eliminates the former no- subsection and aligns with the test's emphasis on conceptual understanding over . The excludes advanced topics such as logarithms beyond exponentials, numbers, matrices, or , prioritizing foundational skills correlated with success.

Adaptive Testing and Question Styles

The digital SAT utilizes a multistage adaptive testing (MST) model, dividing the Reading and Writing section into two modules of 32 minutes each (totaling 64 minutes and 54 questions) and the Math section into two modules of 35 minutes each (totaling 70 minutes and 44 questions). In this system, the first module of each section presents a fixed mixture of questions spanning easy, medium, and hard difficulties to gauge the test-taker's ability level. Performance on the first module then determines the difficulty of the second module: strong results route the test-taker to a more challenging set of questions, while weaker performance assigns an easier set, enabling precise ability estimation in fewer questions overall. This adaptation occurs separately for Reading and Writing and Math, with scores derived from the total number of correct answers across both modules, equated to the 200-800 scale per section via item response theory to account for varying difficulties and ensure comparability. The model includes unscored pretest questions (two per module) indistinguishable from operational ones, enhancing future test development without affecting individual scores. This adaptive approach shortens the test to approximately 2 hours and 14 minutes while maintaining measurement reliability equivalent to the prior paper-based version, as validated through equating studies. Test-takers can skip or revisit questions within a module before time expires, and there is no penalty for guessing, as scoring is based solely on correct responses. Adaptation thresholds are calibrated such that even an easier second module does not cap scores below true ability; for instance, achieving a perfect requires near-perfect performance across both modules regardless of routing. Question styles in the digital SAT emphasize concise, focused formats suited to the adaptive structure. The Reading and Writing section features discrete multiple-choice questions, each tied to a single short passage (25-150 words) or pair on topics including information and ideas, craft and structure, expression of ideas, and conventions; all questions offer four options with one correct answer. Passages draw from , /, , and workplace contexts, often incorporating graphs or paired texts for analysis. The Math section combines approximately 75% multiple-choice questions (four options each) with 25% student-produced responses, where test-takers enter numerical answers directly via an on-screen , accommodating integers, decimals, fractions, or coordinates up to four characters. Questions cover (35%), advanced math (35%), problem-solving and (15%), and / (15%), with calculator use permitted throughout on approved devices or the built-in . No constructed-response essays or penalty for incorrect answers apply, aligning with the digital format's emphasis on efficiency and accessibility.

Administration and Logistics

Scheduling and Test Frequency

The SAT is administered by the seven times per year, primarily on , to accommodate high school students preparing for college admissions. These administrations occur in (or ), , , , , May, and June, with test centers opening at 7:45 a.m. and doors closing at 8:00 a.m. testing is available as an alternative for students with religious observances conflicting with schedules, upon request during registration. Test dates for the 2025-2026 cycle include August 23, 2025; October 4, 2025; November 8, 2025; December 6, 2025; March 14, 2026; May 2, 2026; and June 6, 2026, though the may adjust these based on operational needs. Registration opens approximately two months prior to each date, with standard deadlines about one month before the test and late registration permitted up to one week prior for an additional fee of $30 (domestic) or equivalent internationally. Scores from these tests are typically released online three to four weeks after administration, such as November 21, 2025, for the November 8 test. In addition to weekend administrations, School Day enables in-school testing coordinated by districts and , expanding access for students without requiring travel to external centers. This option operates within designated windows, such as October 1-31, 2025, for fall testing, allowing flexibility but dependent on school participation and state funding. International test-takers face similar frequency but with region-specific dates and potential adjustments for local holidays, registered through the same online portal. The transition to the digital SAT in March 2024 has not altered the overall frequency, maintaining fixed national dates to standardize conditions while enabling device-based delivery at approved sites.

Fees, Waivers, and Accessibility

The standard registration fee for the SAT in the United States is $68 for test dates beginning August 23, 2025. Additional fees apply for late registration (typically $30), changes to registration after the standard deadline ($29), or test center changes ($25 if within the same region). International test-takers incur an extra $43 non-refundable fee on top of the base registration cost. These fees cover administration, scoring, and score reporting to one or program at no extra charge. Fee waivers are available to eligible low-income students in grades 11 and 12, including U.S. citizens abroad, those enrolled in or eligible for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), or families meeting federal income guidelines (e.g., annual income up to $36,482 for a household of four in 2025). Students can obtain waivers through school counselors or directly via College Board's request form. Benefits include up to two free SAT registrations, waived application fees at participating colleges (over 2,000 institutions), free access to college application platforms like CSS Profile, and unlimited score reports to colleges. In 2024, approximately 400,000 students utilized these waivers, enabling broader participation among economically disadvantaged groups without financial barriers. The shift to a fully SAT format since March 2024 has enhanced accessibility by allowing testing on personal laptops or school-provided devices via the Bluebook app, reducing reliance on fixed test centers and enabling home-based or school-based administration for many. This format supports adjustable font sizes, color contrast, and screen magnification natively, benefiting students with visual or reading challenges, though specialized assistive technologies like refreshable displays are available for approved users. Test availability has expanded, with digital tests offered at over 7,000 U.S. sites including schools, minimizing travel costs and logistical hurdles for rural or low-mobility students. However, students without compatible devices may face barriers unless schools provide loaners, and remains a prerequisite for registration and proctoring.

Accommodations for Test-Takers with Disabilities

The College Board administers accommodations for SAT test-takers with documented disabilities through its Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) program, requiring pre-approval for any modifications to standard testing conditions. Approval is based on evidence of a disability that substantially limits major life activities, such as learning, seeing, or processing information, supported by documentation like an Individualized Education Program (IEP), Section 504 Plan, or evaluations from licensed professionals. School-based accommodations do not automatically transfer to College Board exams; students must submit requests via SSD Online, typically at least seven weeks prior to the test date, with SSD coordinators at schools assisting in verification. Common accommodations include 50% or 100% extended time per , separate testing rooms to minimize distractions, scheduled breaks beyond standard ones, or formats, use of a reader or , and assistive technologies such as text-to-speech software or magnification devices. For the SAT, implemented nationwide in March 2024, accommodations are adapted to the online platform: extended time applies per , screen readers (non-embedded versions) include automatic 50% extra time for approvals before July 21, 2025, and color overlays or high-contrast modes support visual impairments. These measures aim to provide equivalent access without altering the test's underlying constructs of reading, writing, and mathematical reasoning. Usage of accommodations has risen significantly, with over 160,000 requests submitted annually by 2016, representing a doubling from approximately 80,000 in 2010-2011, and approval rates exceeding 85%. Recent data indicate that about 86% of requests across major testing organizations, including the , receive full approval of sought modifications. However, approvals correlate with , as wealthier students are more likely to secure them due to access to evaluations and legal , prompting over whether the process equates opportunity or inadvertently advantages privileged applicants. Critics argue that extended time, the most frequent accommodation, may compromise by shifting the assessment from speeded reasoning to untimed knowledge recall, potentially inflating scores relative to standard conditions and undermining comparability for admissions. Instances of fraud, such as those exposed in the 2019 where accommodations were obtained through fabricated diagnoses, highlight risks of abuse, though such cases represent a small fraction of total approvals. Empirical reviews suggest accommodations generally maintain for performance when properly targeted, but broad approval policies without rigorous need-based scrutiny could erode the test's meritocratic function. The maintains that accommodations ensure fairness by removing disability-related barriers, with scores flagged as nonstandard only for institutional review if needed.

Implementation of the Digital Format

The digital SAT format was first administered internationally in spring 2023, with test dates on March 11, May 6, and June 3 for students outside the and its territories. In the , the transition began with the and PSAT 10 in fall 2023 and spring 2024, respectively, prior to the full SAT rollout. The first U.S. digital SAT weekend administrations occurred on March 9, 2024, at over 3,000 test centers serving more than 200,000 students, marking the completion of the nationwide shift from paper-based testing. Implementation relies on the College Board's application, a custom digital testing platform students download to approved personal or school-managed devices 1–5 days before the exam. Compatible devices include Windows or laptops, iPads, or school Chromebooks, with connectivity required only to initiate and finalize the test session; the app accommodates temporary outages by autosaving progress. Students complete a setup process via Bluebook to verify device compatibility, generate an admission ticket, and ensure no conflicting software runs during testing, such as enabling guided access mode on iPads if needed. For school-day administrations, an 8-week window from March 4 to April 26, 2024, allowed flexibility in scheduling, with proctors using the complementary Test Day Toolkit for monitoring and network management. This digital infrastructure, originally developed for 2021 exams, incorporates features like built-in timers, calculators, and annotation tools to streamline proctoring and reduce logistical burdens compared to paper tests. Post-launch data indicated 99.8% successful test completions and positive feedback, with 84% of students and 99% of staff reporting an improved experience due to shorter duration and simplified setup.

Scoring and Interpretation

Score Calculation and Scales

The digital SAT yields a total score ranging from 400 to 1600, calculated as the sum of two section scores: Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (200–800) and Mathematics (200–800). Each section consists of two adaptive modules, with the first module identical for all test-takers and the second module's difficulty determined by performance on the first; however, all questions contribute equally to the raw score regardless of module difficulty. Raw scores represent the number of correct answers in each , with no for incorrect or unanswered questions, encouraging guessing on uncertain items. For the Reading and Writing , raw scores derive from 54 questions across both modules (27 per module), while raw scores come from 44 questions (22 per module). These raw totals are then converted to scaled section scores through an equating process that adjusts for minor variations in test difficulty across administrations, ensuring scores remain comparable over time and aligned with the pre-digital SAT scale. The does not publicly release exact raw-to-scaled conversion tables, as they vary per test form to maintain score integrity and prevent exploitation. Scaled scores reflect statistical equating models that map raw performance to the 200–800 range, preserving the score distribution's shape and allowing longitudinal comparisons within the SAT Suite (including PSAT variants). For instance, College and Career Readiness Benchmarks remain fixed at 480 for Reading and Writing and 530 for , indicating minimum scores associated with a 75% probability of earning at least a C in first-year college courses in the respective domains. This scaling process, rooted in and historical data, prioritizes reliability over absolute raw counts, though adaptive design may slightly compress variability at score extremes compared to non-adaptive formats. No cross-section compensation occurs; total scores simply aggregate the independent section scales without further adjustment.

Percentiles and Historical Score Distributions

The SAT percentile ranks compare a test-taker's performance to other recent SAT users or a nationally representative sample of U.S. students, with user percentiles reflecting actual test-takers (typically higher-achieving students) and nationally representative percentiles adjusting for the broader population including non-test-takers. These ranks are calculated annually by the based on equated scores from the prior three graduating classes to account for minor test form variations. For the class of 2024, the average total score across all test-takers was 1024 out of , aligning with the 50th user , while section means were 518 for Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (ERW) and 506 for Math. The following table summarizes approximate total score percentiles for the class of 2024 user group, derived from College Board data; a score of 1400, for instance, places a student at the 94th percentile among SAT takers, meaning 94% scored lower.
Total Score RangeUser Percentile
1570–160099+
1530–156099
1490–152097–98
1450–148096
1400–144094–95
1350–139090–93
1300–134086–89
1200–129074–85
1050–119050–73
Below 1050Below 50
Historical score distributions reveal shifts tied to test redesigns, expanding test-taker pools, and demographic changes. Prior to the 1995 recentering, which adjusted the scale upward by about 70–100 points to restore near 500 per section for college-bound seniors, verbal scores averaged around 424 and math 468 in 1972, yielding a combined of 892; post-recentering, verbal means initially rose to 500–530 but trended downward to 520–530 by the amid increased participation from lower-performing students. Math scores remained more stable, hovering at 500–520 for seniors through the 2400-scale era (2005–2016, including Writing) before reverting to a 1600-scale mean of roughly 1030 total in 2017. By 2023–2024, overall means dipped to 1028 and 1024, respectively, reflecting broader access via state-mandated testing and digital formats, with standard deviations typically around 100–110 points per section indicating moderate variability but compressed ceilings for top performers due to scaling. These trends underscore how expanded inclusivity has broadened distributions toward lower scores without altering the test's psychometric properties, as evidenced by consistent correlations with college outcomes. The recentering of SAT scores, which adjusted the scale to raise average section scores from approximately 500 to 530, resulted in a sharp increase in the number of perfect total scores, rising from 25 nationwide in 1994 to 137 in a single April 1995 administration. This adjustment aimed to better reflect student performance relative to college-level expectations but effectively lowered the exclusivity of the score ceiling by compressing the upper distribution and making top scores more attainable on the new scale. Subsequent years saw hundreds of perfect scores annually, though they remained rare at about 0.03% of test-takers, or 400–500 students per graduating class as of 2023. Over the subsequent decades, the proportion of high scores near the ceiling continued to grow. Between 2008 and 2018, the number of students scoring –1600 doubled, and perfect scorers tripled in the five years prior to 2018, driven by expanded access to resources, increased retaking of the exam (often multiple times by top performers), and a larger pool of college-bound students competing for selective admissions. This trend has diluted the signaling value of ceiling-level scores, as admissions officers increasingly encounter larger numbers of applicants in the 1500+ range, prompting some institutions to weigh superscoring (combining best section results across attempts) more heavily. The introduction of the adaptive SAT in March 2024, with module-based difficulty adjustment, has not yet reversed this; early data from the class of 2024 shows sustained high achievement rates among prepared test-takers, though overall averages dipped slightly to 1024. Regarding score variability, the standard deviation of total SAT scores has remained relatively stable at approximately 210 points since the , reflecting intentional equating processes that maintain consistent distribution spreads despite format changes and participant demographics. This stability indicates no broad compression or expansion of the overall score range, with 25th–75th gaps typically spanning 300–400 points in recent total group reports. However, at the upper tail, effects have arguably reduced variability among elite performers, as standardized strategies enable more consistent access to ceiling scores, though raw ability differences persist as evidenced by persistent gaps in for college outcomes. Pre-1995 data, on the original scale, showed similar per-section standard deviations of about 100 points, suggesting the test's psychometric properties have prioritized reliability over time rather than altering inherent score dispersion.

Predictive Validity and Cognitive Correlations

Forecasting College Academic Performance

The SAT serves as a standardized predictor of academic performance, particularly first-year grade point average (FYGPA), with empirical studies demonstrating moderate to strong s between SAT scores and subsequent college grades. In a large-scale analysis of 223,858 students from 171 four-year institutions in the 2017 cohort, the raw between total SAT scores and FYGPA was 0.32, while the adjusted (accounting for range restriction and measurement error) reached 0.51. High school GPA (HSGPA) showed similar raw (0.33) and adjusted (0.53) correlations with FYGPA, but combining SAT scores and HSGPA increased the multiple to 0.42 (raw) and 0.61 (adjusted), representing a 15% incremental predictive gain from the SAT beyond HSGPA alone. This additive value is evident in distinguishing performance among students with similar HSGPAs; for instance, among those with an A-range HSGPA, FYGPA ranged from 2.44 for SAT totals of 600-790 to 3.54 for 1400-1600. Meta-analytic evidence supports the SAT's predictive efficacy, with average correlations between SAT scores and GPA slightly exceeding those for comparable tests like the . A meta-analysis of studies on first-year GPA prediction found no evidence of and confirmed the SAT's utility across diverse samples, though validity coefficients vary by institutional selectivity and student ability levels, with stronger predictions for higher-ability groups. The SAT also correlates with retention and credits earned; in the 2017 study, higher SAT scores were associated with increased likelihood of second-year persistence. For the digital SAT, introduced in 2023-2024, predictive validity remains comparable or enhanced. A 2023 pilot study of 1,889 students across 11 institutions reported a raw of 0.39 and corrected of 0.57 between digital SAT total scores and FYGPA, with a 22% improvement in prediction when combined with HSGPA (multiple of 0.66). This combination yielded even greater gains for STEM majors (38% improvement, multiple of 0.72) and credits earned (28% improvement). These findings indicate that the SAT's forecasting power persists in the digital format, aiding admissions decisions by capturing not fully reflected in HSGPA, such as standardized reasoning under time constraints.

Association with General Intelligence (g-Factor)

The g-factor, or general intelligence, is the dominant common factor extracted from factor analyses of diverse cognitive ability tests, accounting for 40-50% of variance in individual differences in mental performance across domains. The SAT, comprising and mathematical problem-solving components, exhibits substantial loadings on this factor, reflecting its assessment of abstract reasoning, , and knowledge application skills that align with g. from psychometric studies consistently demonstrates correlations between SAT scores and g-derived measures exceeding 0.70, positioning the test as a reliable, if imperfect, indicator of general cognitive ability rather than domain-specific achievement alone. A seminal analysis by Frey and Detterman (2004), utilizing a sample of 162 high-ability adolescents from the (SMPY) who completed both the SAT and a comprehensive battery of 16 cognitive tests (yielding a g composite), reported g-loadings of 0.804 for SAT-Verbal and 0.698 for SAT-Math. These loadings were derived from , where the first unrotated factor explained 52% of test variance, with SAT subtests among the highest contributors. The total SAT score correlated 0.82 with the g factor, enabling regression-based IQ estimation formulas (e.g., IQ ≈ 39.545 + 0.069 × SAT-V + 0.005 × SAT-M, adjusted for age). This study underscored the SAT's utility as a premorbid IQ proxy, particularly for identifying exceptional ability, though it noted potential attenuation due to the sample's restricted range of high scores. Further validation in broader populations has affirmed these associations. For instance, correlations between SAT total scores and g measures from military aptitude tests like the ASVAB reach 0.82, while civilian samples yield estimates of 0.73-0.82, comparable to those between full IQ batteries. These relations persist after controlling for test-specific factors, indicating that g mediates much of the SAT's overlap with other assessments. However, the SAT's g-loading is not absolute; verbal analogies and quantitative comparisons in pre-1994 versions contributed disproportionately to g variance, and post-revision formats (e.g., 1995 recentering and 2016 redesign) may modestly reduce it due to increased emphasis on curriculum-aligned content, though no large-scale decline below 0.70 has been documented in peer-reviewed reanalyses. The SAT's alignment with g derives from its demands on fluid intelligence (novel problem-solving) and crystallized intelligence (acquired knowledge applied flexibly), both of which saturate on the general factor in hierarchical models like Carroll's three-stratum theory. This psychometric grounding explains why SAT scores predict long-term outcomes beyond academics—such as income and occupational attainment—beyond what specific scholastic preparation alone would warrant, with accounting for 20-25% of such variance in longitudinal data. Critics attributing SAT-g links primarily to socioeconomic coaching overlook evidence from twin and studies showing of scores (h² ≈ 0.50-0.70) exceeding environmental confounds, and g's causal role in learning efficiency via first-principles cognitive mechanisms like capacity and processing speed.

Long-Term Outcomes and Non-Academic Utility

Studies indicate that SAT scores exhibit a significant positive with future levels, with one of graduates finding that average SAT scores account for approximately 42% of the variance in salaries six years post-graduation. This relationship persists longitudinally, as evidenced by case studies tracking SAT performance against earnings, which demonstrate that higher scores align with elevated mid-career incomes, independent of college GPA in some models. Such patterns arise partly because SAT scores serve as proxies for general cognitive ability (g), which meta-analyses confirm predicts occupational training success and job performance across diverse roles, with validity coefficients often exceeding 0.5. Longitudinal research on intellectually precocious youth, identified via above-grade-level SAT testing in programs like the (SMPY), further substantiates these outcomes. Participants scoring in the top 1% on SAT sections before age 13, tracked over 35+ years, attain advanced degrees at rates 2-3 times higher than peers, secure patents and publications disproportionately, and report mid-career earnings elevated by 20-50% compared to ability-matched non-accelerated groups. These findings hold after controlling for socioeconomic factors, underscoring SAT's utility in forecasting real-world achievement in innovation-driven fields like , where cognitive demands mirror test constructs. Beyond academics, SAT scores have limited but documented non-academic applications, primarily as informal cognitive screens in selective hiring for high-stakes roles in , consulting, and . Some employers request SAT results to gauge analytical aptitude when resume volume overwhelms traditional assessments, viewing them as standardized metrics akin to g-loaded tests validated for predicting job efficacy. However, widespread adoption is curtailed by legal risks under doctrines, as score distributions vary by protected groups, prompting firms like to de-emphasize them despite underlying predictive merit. In contexts, SAT scores inform eligibility for service academies and officer training pipelines, correlating with leadership and technical proficiency in operational roles. Overall, while not a standard hiring tool, SAT's alignment with validated cognitive predictors supports its incidental value in talent identification outside .

Demographic Patterns and Group Differences

Sex-Based Performance Differences

Males have consistently outperformed females on Mathematics section, with average scores approximately 20 points higher in recent years, while females have scored slightly higher on the Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (ERW) section by 5-10 points. In the 2023 cohort, male test-takers achieved an average Math score of 514 compared to 496 for females, and an ERW score of 516 versus 522 for females, resulting in a total average of 1029 for males and 1018 for females. This pattern yields a modest overall male advantage of 11 points, driven primarily by the Math disparity. Historically, the Math gender gap has persisted since the test's early iterations, with males averaging 30-40 points higher from the 1960s through the 1990s, narrowing slightly to 20-30 points by the 2010s amid format changes and increased female participation in advanced coursework. Verbal/Reading scores showed females occasionally leading by small margins (e.g., 5-10 points) from the onward, a reversal from earlier decades when males held edges, attributed in part to shifts in test emphasizing over . The overall total score gap has fluctuated but favored males by 10-30 points across most years from 1966 to 2023, with temporary convergences during re-norming periods like 1995. Greater male variability in scores contributes to disproportionate at the extremes: males comprise about 57% of test-takers scoring or above in recent data, and a majority of perfect scorers, reflecting higher standard deviations in Math performance (approximately 0.1-0.2 SD larger for males). This variability aligns with patterns in other standardized assessments, where males dominate high-end quantiles despite similar means in some domains.
YearMale Math Avg.Female Math Avg.Male ERW/Verbal Avg.Female ERW/Verbal Avg.Total Gap (Male Advantage)
2023514496516522+11
2018531511533534+19
1995510494505496+25
Data reflect college-bound seniors; gaps stable post-2016 redesign but with Math disparity as primary driver.

Racial and Ethnic Group Differences

Average SAT scores differ markedly by racial and ethnic group, with Asian test-takers recording the highest means and Black/African American test-takers the lowest, according to College Board annual reports. For the class of 2025, the mean total SAT score (out of 1600) was 1229 for Asians, 1077 for Whites, 928 for Hispanics/Latinos, and 904 for Blacks. These patterns hold across Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (ERW) and Math sections, though Asians outperform Whites particularly in Math (630 vs. 527), while Whites score higher than Asians in ERW (550 vs. 599). Similar disparities appear in the class of 2024 data, with Asians at 1228 total, Whites at 1083, Hispanics/Latinos at 939, and Blacks at 907.
Race/EthnicityTest TakersTotalERWMath
217,4591229599630
743,9811077550527
/537,624928474454
/ American250,887904464440
American Indian/Alaska Native9,237874445429
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander3,053922470452
Two or More s82,0321073550524
Data from class of 2025; scores out of 1600 total, 800 per section. These group differences have persisted historically, with the Black-White gap averaging around 170-200 points in recent decades, down from approximately 240 points in 1976. The gap narrowed modestly from the to the but has remained stable since, even as overall scores fluctuated due to test redesigns and participation changes. Asian-White advantages, particularly in Math, have grown with increased Asian test-taker participation and performance. Socioeconomic status (SES) explains part but not all of the variances; studies indicate SES factors account for 34-64% of racial achievement gaps, with residual differences persisting after controls for family income, parental , and school quality. For instance, Black-White SAT gaps widen rather than narrow at higher parental levels, and school-level effects reduce but do not eliminate disparities. /ethnicity reporting follows U.S. Department of guidelines, using self-reported from the most recent assessments, which may introduce minor inconsistencies across years.

Socioeconomic, Familial, and Educational Background Influences

exerts a substantial on SAT performance, with family showing a strong positive correlation to scores. Data from the indicate that students from the highest income bracket (over $200,000 annually) averaged a combined SAT score of 1,714 in recent administrations, compared to 953 for those from families earning under $20,000. This gap persists across quintiles; for instance, in the lowest income quintile ($0–$55,667), the average Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (ERW) score was 455 and Math 443, yielding a total near 900, while the highest quintile exceeded 600 per section. Peer-reviewed analyses confirm that SES accounts for a notable portion of score variance, often through mechanisms like access to and enriched learning environments, though the exact causal pathways remain debated.
Family Income QuintileNumber of Test-TakersAverage ERW ScoreAverage Math ScoreTotal Score
Lowest ($0–$55,667)200,048455443898
Highest (>$140,000)~200,000 (est.)>600>600>1,200
Such disparities highlight how higher SES facilitates resources correlating with higher outcomes, including private and stable home environments. Parental education level similarly predicts SAT scores, independent of but compounding income effects. Students whose parents lacked a averaged a total SAT score of 903, while those with parents holding graduate degrees scored over 1,200 on average. This pattern holds in longitudinal data; for example, among high school graduates taking the SAT, mean scores rose monotonically with reported parental attainment, from 950 for no college to 1,200+ for advanced degrees. modeling family influences attributes this to intergenerational transmission of academic skills, , and expectations, rather than genetics alone, though twin studies suggest partial confounding pure environmental effects. Familial structure influences scores via stability and resource allocation. Analyses of applicants found family background—including intact households and sibling composition—explaining up to 40% of SAT/ACT variance, with children from single-parent or low-resource homes scoring 100–200 points lower on average after controls. Intact families correlate with higher scores due to concentrated investments in , as evidenced by sibling-pair data showing younger siblings in stable structures mirroring higher-achieving elders. However, these effects are mediated by SES, with amplifying disruptions from family instability. Educational background, particularly school type, further modulates performance. Students in independent private schools averaged 1,645 combined SAT scores in 2016 data, surpassing public school averages of 1,453 by nearly 200 points. Religious private schools also outperform publics, with means of 581 ERW and 572 Math versus 529 and 520, respectively. These differences stem from smaller class sizes, advanced curricula, and selective admissions, though self-selection and SES confound direct causality; public magnet or charter schools narrow but do not eliminate the gap. Overall, higher-quality educational inputs, often tied to familial resources, elevate SAT readiness and outcomes.

Historical Development

Origins as an Aptitude Test (1920s–1950s)

The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) originated from adaptations of group intelligence tests developed during , specifically the and exams created under to assess recruits' cognitive abilities en masse. These military tests emphasized verbal analogies, arithmetic reasoning, and to gauge innate mental capacity rather than learned knowledge, influencing civilian applications for selecting high-potential individuals. Carl C. Brigham, a Princeton who contributed to the testing program, refined these methods into a admissions tool, arguing that tests could objectively identify intellectual talent independent of socioeconomic privilege or preparatory schooling. The , founded in 1900 to standardize entrance exams, commissioned Brigham to develop in the early as a supplement to achievement-based tests, with the explicit aim of measuring "scholastic aptitude"—understood as an inherent, general cognitive ability predictive of academic success. The inaugural administration occurred on June 23, 1926, to 8,040 high school students, approximately 60% male and primarily from private schools in the Northeast, lasting 90 minutes and comprising nine subtests dominated by verbal sections such as definitions, analogies, and classification, alongside limited quantitative elements like number series. Scores were normed against a mean of 500, with elite colleges like Harvard and Princeton adopting the test by the late to prioritize merit over admissions, enabling broader talent scouting. Through the 1930s and 1940s, the SAT retained its aptitude-oriented design, resisting heavy coaching influences by focusing on abstract reasoning over rote content, though disruptions temporarily halted administrations. By the , annual test-takers exceeded 100,000, and the format stabilized into distinct verbal and mathematical components, each scaled to 800 points, as postwar expansion democratized access to via Bill-funded scholarships tied to aptitude scores. Proponents, including Harvard President James Bryant Conant, championed the SAT for fostering a meritocratic elite based on raw intellectual potential, evidenced by correlations between early scores and subsequent college performance in selective institutions.

Mid-Century Expansions and Standardizations (1960s–1980s)

During the 1960s and 1970s, the SAT experienced substantial growth in participation, driven by post-World War II expansions in access, the generation's college aspirations, and policies such as the , which increased federal aid for postsecondary enrollment. The number of SAT test-takers rose from approximately 800,000 in the early 1960s to over 1.4 million by the 1977–1978 , reflecting a diversification in the pool of examinees that included more students from varied socioeconomic and academic backgrounds. This expansion aligned with broader societal shifts toward mass , though it contributed to observed declines in average scores, attributed primarily to changes in the demographic composition of test-takers rather than alterations in test difficulty. To enhance efficiency and predictive validity, the implemented format adjustments in the 1970s. In 1974, both verbal and sections were shortened from 75 to each, with compensatory adjustments in question types to preserve content coverage; notably, the section replaced data sufficiency questions—introduced in 1959—with quantitative comparison items, which allowed faster resolution while maintaining statistical reliability. The verbal section, restructured in the to emphasize antonyms, analogies, sentence completions, and passages, saw further increases in passage-based questions during this period, aiming to better assess reasoning over isolated . These modifications supported ongoing equating procedures to ensure score comparability across test forms and administrations, upholding the standardized scale normed at a mean of 500 with a standard deviation of 100. Supplementary assessments were introduced to address specific skill gaps and aid admissions decisions. The Test of Standard Written English (TSWE), piloted experimentally in and operationalized by 1977, added a 30-minute multiple-choice component evaluating , usage, and expression, scored separately on a 20–80 scale (later rescaled). This tool, intended to identify students needing remedial writing support without integrating into the core SAT score, exemplified efforts to refine the testing ecosystem amid criticisms of verbal score declines. The also began publicly releasing sample questions in to promote and . ![Historical average SAT scores of college-bound seniors.](./assets/Historical_Average_SAT_Scores_Vector

Modern Revisions and Challenges (1990s–2010s)

In the early , the faced scrutiny over persistent declines in average SAT scores, with verbal means hovering around 420 and math around 480 for college-bound seniors from 1980 to 1994, deviating from the original 500-point norms established in . To address this and restore comparability to historical benchmarks, the SAT scale was recentered starting with the April 1995 administration, boosting verbal scores by approximately 70-100 points and math by 20-30 points to return averages near 500. This adjustment, based on equating to a 1990 reference group rather than the 1941 norm, aimed to better reflect contemporary test-taker abilities but sparked , as it inflated individual scores—such as increasing perfect 1600s from 25 in 1994 to 137 in April 1995 alone—and was accused by some of masking underlying educational shortcomings rather than resolving them. Empirical analyses confirmed that while raw score distributions shifted, ranks remained largely stable, indicating the change primarily rescaled without altering relative standings. Concurrently, in 1990, the test's name shifted from "Scholastic Test" to "Scholastic Test" to de-emphasize implications of measuring fixed innate and instead highlight learned skills, responding to critiques that the original terminology overstated the exam's scope as a pure gauge. These modifications occurred amid broader challenges, including growing evidence of score gaps by and preparation access, with data showing higher-income families increasingly investing in , which correlated with score gains but raised questions about the test's meritocratic validity. By the mid-1990s, competition from the intensified, as it offered a curriculum-based alternative perceived as less vulnerable to allegations, prompting the to defend the SAT's predictive power for college GPA while acknowledging preparation disparities. The most substantial overhaul came in 2005, transforming the SAT into a three-section totaling 2400 points: (800), math (800, now extending to higher-level topics like algebra II), and a new writing section (800, featuring an and questions) that replaced analogies and reduced quantitative comparisons. Motivated by system critiques and ACT's rising popularity, these revisions sought to align more closely with high school curricula, enhance of communication skills, and eliminate elements seen as outdated or coachable through rote . Initial post-revision showed mixed results, with average scores dipping slightly in 2006 ( to 503, math to 518, writing to 493) and continuing a downward trend through the , reaching decade lows by 2015 despite expanded test-taking pools and preparation resources. Lacking robust pre-implementation studies on , the changes faced skepticism regarding whether the added writing component meaningfully improved college readiness forecasts or merely increased administrative burdens and vulnerability to coaching variability. Throughout the and , persistent challenges included stagnant or declining national averages amid rising test participation—from 41% of high school graduates in 1990 to over 50% by 2005—which some attributed to broader educational quality issues rather than test flaws, as SAT scores correlated more strongly with socioeconomic factors than with policy interventions like increased funding. Critics, including academic researchers, highlighted effects on minority performance, though empirical replications yielded inconsistent results, with meta-analyses affirming the SAT's g-loading and utility in controlling for credentials inflation. The era also saw lawsuits alleging anticompetitive practices by the and , alongside demands for greater transparency in scoring algorithms, underscoring tensions between the test's role in standardizing admissions and pressures to accommodate diverse preparation inequities without diluting its cognitive demands.

Digital Transformation and 2024–2025 Updates

The initiated the transition to a fully digital SAT format in early 2022, with the test first administered digitally to students beginning in 2023 and to U.S. students starting March 9, 2024, marking the end of the paper-based version domestically. This shift aimed to reduce testing time from approximately three hours to two hours and 14 minutes, increase time per question, and enhance security through device-based delivery via testing app, which supports school-issued or personal laptops and tablets meeting specified technical requirements. The digital SAT incorporates multistage adaptive testing, dividing each of the two main sections—Reading and Writing (64 minutes total) and Math (70 minutes total)—into two modules of equal length. The first module in each section presents questions of standard difficulty drawn from the full range of item difficulties; performance on this module determines the difficulty level of the second module, which features either harder questions (for strong performers) or easier ones (for weaker performers) to more precisely measure ability while maintaining score comparability to the prior format. Math sections permit use throughout, including a built-in , eliminating the previous no-calculator portion. Scores remain on the 400–1600 scale, with section scores of 200–800, and no equating tables are required between digital and paper versions due to psychometric adjustments ensuring equivalent meaning. By September , the digital transition had been completed for the SAT Suite, including the administered digitally in fall 2023, with U.S. SAT participation rising 3% year-over-year to 1.97 million test-takers in the 2023–24 school year despite the format change. For the 2024–2025 testing cycle, the format remains unchanged, with registration open for dates through June 2025 and continued emphasis on accessibility features like extended time and reader accommodations adapted for digital delivery. Early data indicate average scores held steady or slightly increased post-transition, though critics have questioned whether adaptive modules compromise test rigor by limiting exposure to high-difficulty items for lower performers.

Controversies and Criticisms

Allegations of Cultural or Socioeconomic Bias

Critics have alleged that the SAT exhibits socioeconomic , primarily because average scores correlate positively with family income levels. For example, data from the College Board's SAT Suite of Assessments indicated that students from families earning $100,000 or more annually achieved mean total scores approximately 200 points higher than those from families earning less than $20,000. Similarly, a analysis by Opportunity Insights found that children from the top 1% income bracket were 13 times more likely to score 1300 or above on the SAT or than those from the bottom income quintile. Proponents of this view argue that higher-income families provide advantages such as access to costly courses, private tutoring, and enriched educational environments, which familiarize students with the test format and content. However, empirical psychometric research has challenged the notion that these score disparities indicate inherent test bias, emphasizing instead that the SAT demonstrates consistent for outcomes across socioeconomic strata. A 2024 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper analyzed longitudinal data from over 2 million students and concluded that scores, including the SAT, predict first-year GPA and retention rates four times more accurately than high school GPA alone, with no of adverse impact against lower-socioeconomic students after controlling for prior achievement. This validity holds because the test measures like reasoning and problem-solving, which correlate with general intelligence (g-factor) independently of family wealth once baseline academic preparation is accounted for. Studies of (DIF), which statistically detect items that perform differently across groups after equating ability levels, have repeatedly shown minimal socioeconomic DIF in SAT items, as verified through analyses by the test's developers. Allegations of often invoke historical examples, such as a SAT analogy question comparing "oarlocks" to "regatta," which purportedly favored students familiar with rowing—a pastime more common in affluent, white communities—but such items were excised during test revisions in the . Contemporary claims, including those by Robert Freedle in 2003 asserting scoring bias against African American test-takers due to subtler verbal items, have been critiqued for methodological flaws, such as failing to control adequately for overall ability differences; subsequent reviews and independent replications found no systematic cultural loading in modern SAT content. The SAT's shift toward domain-specific reasoning—reducing reliance on esoteric or cultural trivia in favor of math, evidence-based reading, and data interpretation—has further diminished potential cultural artifacts, as evidenced by stable predictive validities across diverse U.S. subpopulations in validity generalization studies. Socioeconomic influences on scores are better explained by causal factors upstream of the test itself, such as variations in quality, structure, and parental , rather than test design flaws. models incorporating , parental , and poverty exposure explain up to 40% of score variance, but residual gaps persist even after these controls, pointing to unmeasured variables like cognitive home environments or motivation rather than . Moreover, alternatives to the SAT, such as admissions essays, exhibit stronger correlations, with stylistic features in essays predicting household more robustly than SAT scores themselves. In contexts like the University of California's suspension of SAT requirements from 2020 to 2025, empirical post-hoc analyses revealed no gains in or , but rather increased reliance on subjective high GPA, which amplifies socioeconomic advantages through in affluent districts. Thus, while raw score disparities reflect broader societal inequalities, the SAT functions as a relatively impartial merit signal, with claims often overstated by overlooking its g-loaded structure and uniform forecasting power.

Effects of Coaching and Preparation Variability

Studies examining the impact of on SAT scores, including meta-analyses of multiple experiments, have consistently found modest average gains attributable to programs. A 1983 meta-analysis of 14 studies on estimated effects of approximately 12 points on the verbal section and 19 points on the math section, after accounting for regression to the mean and other statistical artifacts. Subsequent syntheses, such as those reviewing data through the , reported similar small effects, with commercial programs yielding gains of 10-20 points per section on average, though these were often indistinguishable from gains achieved through self-directed practice or repeated test exposure. These findings suggest that while influences scores, the SAT's as an measure limits the magnitude of coachable improvements, as gains primarily stem from test familiarity, strategy acquisition, and reduced anxiety rather than enhanced underlying cognitive abilities. Preparation variability introduces significant heterogeneity in outcomes, with effects moderated by factors such as program intensity, student motivation, and baseline ability. For instance, analyses of the National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS:88) data indicated that students engaging in private or structured courses saw score increases of about 20-30 points over uncoached peers, but only after controlling for self-selection bias, where higher-motivated students disproportionately seek prep. Self-study via official practice materials, as tracked by the , correlates with higher scores, with students completing multiple full-length practice tests averaging 40-60 point gains compared to non-practicers, though causation is confounded by selection effects—diligent students both practice more and score higher independently. Low-income or first-generation students, who often lack access to costly (averaging $1,000+ per course), exhibit lower average participation rates, exacerbating score disparities not solely tied to but to resource availability. Causal inference challenges persist due to non-random assignment in observational prep studies, with randomized trials rare and often underpowered. Econometric approaches, such as those using instrumental variables to isolate effects, confirm small causal impacts—typically under 50 points total—while highlighting that commercial claims of 100+ point boosts lack empirical support and may reflect marketing rather than rigorous evidence. Variability in preparation thus contributes to score distributions reflecting not only innate ability but also unequal investments in time and resources, though the SAT's for performance holds even after adjusting for reported prep levels. Recent SAT data reinforces that consistent practice yields incremental benefits, but set in beyond 10-20 hours, underscoring preparation's role as a marginal rather than transformative factor.

Test-Optional Movements and Their Empirical Impacts

The test-optional movement gained momentum in the late , with over 1,000 U.S. colleges adopting policies allowing applicants to withhold SAT or scores by 2020, accelerated by disruptions to testing. These policies aimed to broaden access amid critiques of test bias, but empirical analyses reveal mixed outcomes, often undermining academic predictability without substantial diversity gains. By 2025, selective institutions like , Yale, and reinstated requirements, citing data on test scores' superior prognostic value for college performance. Studies indicate test-optional policies increase application volumes—e.g., a statistically significant rise in both applications and enrollments at adopting schools—but primarily from stronger candidates who self-select to submit scores, leading to higher admission rates and scholarships for submitters compared to non-submitters. Non-submitters, often from underrepresented or lower-income backgrounds, tend to exhibit lower incoming academic preparedness, with high school GPAs inflating due to trends that tests help calibrate. At colleges, such policies disproportionately disadvantage high-achieving applicants from disadvantaged socioeconomic strata, reducing their admission odds by obscuring merit signals in holistic reviews prone to subjective biases. Regarding diversity, evidence shows minimal to negligible boosts in enrollment of racial minorities, low-income students, or first-generation attendees; one of policies found no significant shifts in racial, , or socioeconomic composition, while another noted barriers for first-generation applicants less likely to self-report amid uncertainty. Claims of enhanced at institutions like , which reported higher minority representation post-2015 adoption, rely on self-assessed metrics and overlook counterfactuals from comparable test-required peers. Academic outcomes further highlight limitations: standardized tests predict GPA and rates four times more effectively than high school GPA alone, particularly at selective where mismatches from test-blind or optional regimes correlate with higher attrition. data from 2024 confirms scores outperform GPAs in forecasting remedial needs and completion, suggesting test-optional admissions risk admitting underprepared students whose non-submission masks predictive shortfalls, potentially exacerbating gaps through unaddressed deficits. While some pre-2020 analyses claimed in outcomes, post-pandemic reviews incorporating broader adoption reveal persistent underperformance among non-submitters, informing reversions to required testing for causal alignment between admissions and success. Policy debates surrounding the use of SAT scores in admissions have centered on their role as an predictor of success versus concerns over access barriers for underrepresented groups. Proponents argue that SAT scores provide a standardized that complements high school GPA, enhancing for performance; meta-analyses indicate that standardized tests explain an additional 5-10% of variance in first-year GPA beyond grades alone. Critics, often from advocacy groups like FairTest, contend that scores reflect socioeconomic advantages through disparities, advocating test-optional policies to broaden applicant pools. These debates escalated after the U.S. Supreme Court's June 29, 2023, ruling in v. Harvard, which prohibited race-conscious admissions, positioning SAT scores as a race-neutral tool for merit-based selection while holistic reviews risk subjective biases. Empirical studies on test-optional policies, adopted widely during the , reveal mixed outcomes but underscore drawbacks for high-achieving students from disadvantaged backgrounds. A 2025 NBER analysis of elite admissions found that test-optional regimes reduced admission likelihood by 10-20% for top-percentile scorers from low-income or underrepresented minority groups, as admissions officers lacked data to identify overlooked talent amid surging applications. Conversely, some institutions reported modest enrollment gains for Pell Grant-eligible students (3-4% increases) under optional policies, though these were not sustained post-reinstatement experiments. Public surveys reflect growing support for requiring scores, with 70-80% of U.S. adults favoring their consideration to ensure . In response, institutions like Yale (February 2024), (February 2024), and Harvard (September 2025) reinstated mandatory SAT/ACT submission for the Class of 2029, citing internal data showing scores' utility in predicting success and aiding socioeconomic diversity without racial proxies. Legal challenges to SAT score usage have primarily targeted systems, alleging violations of equal protection under the 14th Amendment by perpetuating racial and socioeconomic disparities. In December 2019, a filed by civil rights groups against the system claimed that requiring SAT or scores discriminated against underrepresented minorities, multilingual students, and those with disabilities, seeking their elimination as admissions criteria. The Board of Regents responded by phasing out test requirements in 2020, adopting a test-blind policy amid ongoing litigation, though empirical reviews later questioned whether scores independently caused inequities or merely correlated with preparation gaps. Post-2023 ruling, challenges shifted indirectly; anti-DEI guidance from the incoming administration in 2025 scrutinized test-optional policies alongside race-based practices, arguing they obscure merit and enable claims. No federal courts have invalidated SAT use outright, as evidence affirms its non-discriminatory intent and job-like validation under Title VI, though advocacy persists for equity-focused reforms.

References

  1. [1]
    Show Colleges You're Ready with the #1 Admissions Test - SAT Suite
    Oct 28, 2024 · The SAT supports success in school and can help you on your path to college. Access your My SAT Dashboard to register or send SAT scores.What's on the SAT · SAT Registration · SAT and College Success · Getting Scores
  2. [2]
    A Brief History of the SAT | BestColleges
    Aug 15, 2022 · The SAT dates back to 1926 and evolved from an Army IQ test. The college admissions exam originally claimed to test innate intelligence. The ...
  3. [3]
    How Are Scores Calculated? - SAT Suite - College Board
    Each test section—1) Reading and Writing and 2) Math—is administered in two stages. Each stage consists of a module of test questions comprising half of the ...
  4. [4]
    [PDF] The Digital SAT® Suite of Assessments Specifications Overview
    The digital SAT Suite assessments will be administered on College Board's customized digital testing application. The application is a modified version of the ...<|separator|>
  5. [5]
    What We Know, Are Still Getting Wrong, and Have Yet to Learn ... - NIH
    Dec 2, 2019 · Including SAT scores in regression analyses yielded a roughly 15% increase in predictive power above using high school grades alone.
  6. [6]
    SAT as a Predictor of College Success - Manhattan Review
    SAT scores were strongly predictive of college performance—students with higher SAT scores were more likely to have higher grades in college. SAT scores were ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Validity versus Utility of Mental Tests: Example of the SAT
    Jencks and Crouse (1982) found no studies in 1982 comparing the predictive validity of the SAT versus achievement tests, but they marshalled various kinds of ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  8. [8]
    The SAT Still Measures What Matters - All Access | College Board
    Aug 6, 2025 · The SAT was created by College Board a century ago to give college admissions officers a consistent standard for assessing who was ready for ...
  9. [9]
    What Does SAT Stand For? A Brief History of the Test
    Jan 25, 2020 · While the first College Board test was administered in 1901, the organization didn't introduce the SAT until 1926. At the time, the acronym SAT ...
  10. [10]
    Where Did The Test Come From? - History Of The Sat - A Timeline
    The SAT originated from Carl Brigham's objective version of the Army test, developed by a College Board committee, and first administered in 1926.
  11. [11]
    How the SAT Is Structured - SAT Suite - College Board
    The SAT is composed of two sections: (1) the Reading and Writing section, and (2) the Math section. You have 64 minutes to complete the Reading and Writing ...
  12. [12]
    The NEW Digital SAT: What You Need to Know
    The new SAT won't be available until spring 2024, making the high school class of 2025 the first group to take the digital version.
  13. [13]
    SAT in 2025 - Everything You Need to Know - Test Ninjas
    Feb 21, 2025 · The 2025 SAT is digital, adaptive, with two Reading/Writing and two Math modules. The first module difficulty determines the second module ...
  14. [14]
    SAT Validity - College Board Research
    Results showed that SAT scores remain consistently predictive of cumulative GPA through each year of college, and these findings hold for all student and ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] The Relative Validity of SAT Scores and High School GPA as ...
    Last, SAT-Math proved a stronger predictor of retention than SAT-ERW, and added predictive value to success models, albeit less so than HSGPA. INTRODUCTION. In ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Predictive Validity of the SAT® for Higher Education Systems and ...
    The SAT Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (ERW) section is a strong predictor of first-year college success overall and success in English and writing ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Standardized Test Scores and Academic Performance at Ivy-Plus ...
    Even among otherwise similar students with the same high school grades, we find that SAT and ACT scores have substantial predictive power for academic success ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] Research Evidence on the Relationship Between SAT® Scores and ...
    Recent research demonstrates that SAT® scores are valuable at many points of the enrollment cycle, including post-admission, when colleges are making critical ...
  19. [19]
    Predictive Validity of the SAT - College Board International
    Research shows 38% more predictive power using digital SAT scores than using high school GPA alone (Westrick, Marini, Young, Ng, & Shaw, 2023). Learn more about ...
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Meta-Analysis of the Predictive Validity of Scholastic Aptitude Test ...
    Predictive validity refers to how accurately a test can predict some future outcome such as academic success (Green, 1991).
  21. [21]
    Test-Optional Policies and Disadvantaged Students | NBER
    Apr 1, 2025 · They find that test-optional policies reduce the probability of admission for high-achieving, disadvantaged students.
  22. [22]
    [PDF] New Evidence on the Effect of Changes in College Admissions ...
    Widespread test-optional admissions policies in fall 2021 were associated with a 3.8 percentage point increase in the share of enrollees who are Black, ...
  23. [23]
    Investigating the Effects of Test-Optional Admissions Policies
    Findings demonstrate that test-optional policy implementation results in a statistically significant increase in applications and enrolled students.
  24. [24]
    [PDF] A Validation Review of the SAT and ACT for College and University ...
    Apr 22, 2025 · The SATs and ACTs have played key roles in college and university admissions decisions in the US and many other countries (Edwards et al ...
  25. [25]
    Digital SAT Launches Across the Country, Completing the Transition ...
    Mar 12, 2024 · The digital SAT provides a shorter test, with more time per question, and an overall streamlined testing experience for students and educators.
  26. [26]
    The Reading and Writing Section - SAT Suite - College Board
    The Reading and Writing section presents short reading passages (or passage pairs) followed by a single multiple-choice question.
  27. [27]
    What is Digital SAT Adaptive Testing? - College Board Blog
    Aug 14, 2023 · Each test section (Reading and Writing, and Math) is divided into two equal-length, separately timed parts called modules. You'll answer a set ...Missing: structure | Show results with:structure
  28. [28]
    The Math Section: Overview - SAT Suite - College Board
    The Math section focuses on the areas of math that play the biggest role in college and career success: Algebra; Advanced Math; Problem-Solving and Data ...
  29. [29]
    Digital SAT Test: Understanding the Structure | The Princeton Review
    This section also has a built-in Calculator (a version of the Desmos ... The first section is Reading and Writing, and the second section is Math.Digital Sat Test... · Free Digital Sat Practice... · Reading And Writing
  30. [30]
    SAT Dates and Deadlines - SAT Suite - College Board
    August 2025–June 2026 Test Dates ; Apr. 17, 2026. Register · May 22, 2026. Register ; April 21, 2026 · May 26, 2026.
  31. [31]
    SAT Test Dates for 2025-2026 - StudyPoint
    2025-2026 Anticipated SAT Test Dates & Registration Deadlines ; June 7, 2025, May 22, 2025, June 20, 2025 ; August 23, 2025, August 8, 2025, September 5, 2025.
  32. [32]
    What to Expect on Test Day - SAT Suite - College Board
    Test centers open at 7:45 am and doors close at 8 am unless otherwise noted on your admission ticket. You can't be admitted once testing has started.
  33. [33]
    SAT Test Dates: Full Guide to Choosing (2025, 2026)
    SAT Dates and Deadlines 2025-2026. In general, the College Board administers the SAT on Saturdays, with more tests offered in the fall. If you can't take the ...
  34. [34]
    SAT Registration - SAT Suite - College Board
    2025. TUE, OCT 28, 2025. Late Registration Deadline for November SAT · 2025. SAT, NOV 8, 2025. 7:45 AM Local · 2025. FRI, NOV 21, 2025. November SAT Score Release.Test Fees · International Testing · Fee Waivers · What to Bring and Do on Test...
  35. [35]
    Test Dates and Deadlines | In-School Testing - SAT Suite
    The Fall 2025 testing window for all assessments in the SAT Suite is October 1-31. Districts and schools will be able to administer all three assessments on as ...
  36. [36]
    SAT Test Fees – SAT Suite of Assessments - College Board
    For test dates beginning with August 23, 2025, the SAT registration fee is $68. Some students are eligible for a fee waiver. Additional Registration Fees.
  37. [37]
    International Fees - SAT Suite - College Board
    SAT Registration Fee. For test dates beginning with August 23, 2025, the SAT registration fee is $68, plus a $43 international fee. Additional Registration Fees.
  38. [38]
    Fees and Refunds - SAT Suite - College Board
    The cost of the SAT depends on when you register and any additional services you order. Some students might qualify for fee waivers.<|separator|>
  39. [39]
    Fee Waiver Eligibility - SAT Suite - College Board
    SAT fee waivers are available to low-income 11th- and 12th-grade students living in the United States or territories and U.S. citizens living abroad.
  40. [40]
    Your Guide to SAT Fee Waivers - BigFuture - College Board
    Am I Eligible for an SAT Fee Waiver? · You're enrolled in or eligible for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) · Your family meets income eligibility ...
  41. [41]
    Fee Waivers - SAT Suite - College Board
    If you think you're eligible, talk to your school counselor about getting a fee waiver code or request a fee waiver directly from College Board.Fee Waiver Benefits · Fee Waiver Eligibility · Getting Fee Waiver Benefits
  42. [42]
    Fee Waiver Benefits - SAT Suite - College Board
    If you qualify for a SAT fee waiver, you'll get free tests and several other benefits to help you apply for college.Getting Fee Waiver Benefits · SAT Score Verification · College Board- BigFuture
  43. [43]
    [PDF] SAT Fee Waiver Student Brochure
    Aug 14, 2025 · Fee waivers cover more than just the testing fees. Eligible students can use SAT fee waivers to cover: 1. Up to 2 registration fees for SAT ...
  44. [44]
    SAT Fee Waivers - SAT Suite - College Board
    SAT fee waivers allow eligible students to take the SAT for free and get other benefits to apply to college.
  45. [45]
    Accommodations and Assistive Technology - Bluebook
    Students who use refreshable braille displays (RBDs) can access text-based content in the digital exams. Alternative test is provided for all graphics. RBDs ...Accessing Bluebook Features... · Chromebook · Windows · MacOS
  46. [46]
    Accommodations on College Board Exams | College Board
    To get accommodations for College Board exams, students must request and be approved by College Board’s Services for Students with Disabilities, which differs ...
  47. [47]
    About Accommodations
    College Board considers all requests for accommodations needed by students with documented disabilities. Read about some of the accommodations we provide.Other Accommodations · How Accommodations Work... · Extended Time · Breaks
  48. [48]
    Testing Accommodations for the SAT and ACT - IvyWise
    Dec 19, 2024 · Students must apply to Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) at least 7 weeks before test registration to allow time for processing.<|separator|>
  49. [49]
    Who is Eligible for Testing Accommodations During the PSAT, SAT ...
    Students who receive disability-related accommodations for in-school tests do not automatically qualify for accommodations on College Board exams.
  50. [50]
    Extended Time - College Board Accommodations
    Learn about College Board's policies for extended time and which students are eligible to test with this accommodation.
  51. [51]
    [PDF] Fall 2025 Accommodations and Supports Handbook
    Accommodations may modify the test timing, setting, or materials. Some examples of accommodations are braille, large-print tests, and extended time.
  52. [52]
    Using Accommodations - SAT Suite - College Board
    Students approved for a braille accommodation will test digitally using their own refreshable braille display or screen reader. Students using a screen reader ...
  53. [53]
    SSD Updates - College Board Accommodations
    Students approved for a screen reader for digital tests (non-embedded) before July 21, 2025 automatically had 50% extended time added to their accommodations.
  54. [54]
    Have SAT Accommodations Gone Too Far? - Education Week
    Aug 24, 2017 · The board received (and approved 85 percent of) around 80,000 accommodation requests in 2010-11 and 160,000 requests in 2015-16, according to ...<|separator|>
  55. [55]
    How to Apply for ACT and SAT Accommodations - College Transitions
    Jul 28, 2021 · Every year, more than 160,000 high school students apply to receive accommodations on the SAT; more than 85% of those requests are granted.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  56. [56]
    The Latest Data on Testing Accommodations - Applerouth
    Aug 8, 2022 · Across the five testing companies with available data, 86 percent of individuals received all of their requested accommodations.
  57. [57]
    Why Are the Wealthy More Likely to Get Extra Time on the SAT?
    May 27, 2019 · New analysis raises questions about fairness. But is issue rich students getting accommodations they don't deserve or low-income students ...
  58. [58]
    Common Problems with Test Accommodations and How to Solve ...
    Jul 22, 2025 · Explore the problems with test accommodations, like extended time for the SAT and ACT. Lack of evidence and potential abuse raise concerns ...
  59. [59]
    The Truth About Getting Extra Time on the SAT - Psychology Today
    Jun 26, 2019 · Those with a documented disability are often granted additional time to complete testing, generally 50 percent more than other students but in ...
  60. [60]
    [PDF] Testing Accommodations: The Perils of the “Approve Everything ...
    On the other hand, some schools are questioning the fairness of providing almost anyone with accommodations, regardless of an established disability-related ...Missing: criticisms | Show results with:criticisms
  61. [61]
    Timeline for the New Digital SAT - Mindfish Test Prep & Academics
    May 7, 2023 · Students testing outside of the US or the US territories have already taken or will take the Digital SAT March 11, May 6, and June 3, 2023.
  62. [62]
    Prepare a Personal Device - Bluebook - College Board
    Bluebook must be the only application running during the test. Guided access mode: If you're using an iPad, make sure guided access mode is turned off.
  63. [63]
    How to Use the Bluebook SAT App: Complete Guide
    Bluebook is a student testing app for the digital SAT. Download it, set it up 1-5 days before the exam, and generate your admission ticket.
  64. [64]
    How Do You Calculate Digital SAT Score? Raw and Scaled
    Learn here how to calculate SAT scores, including section scores and composite score. Factor in missed questions to get your scaled scores.
  65. [65]
    SAT Score Chart: Raw Score Conversion to Scaled Score
    Reading and Writing has 54 questions (which used to indicate a maximum raw score of 54), and Math has 44 questions (which indicated a maximum raw score of 44).
  66. [66]
    How SAT Scores are Calculated - Manhattan Review
    The total SAT score (400-1600) is the sum of two section scores (200-800 each). Raw scores are converted to scaled scores, then section scores are calculated ...
  67. [67]
    Benchmarks - SAT Suite - College Board
    Benchmark Values and Section Score Ranges ; Reading and Writing: 480; Math: 530 ; Reading and Writing: 460; Math: 510 ; Reading and Writing: 430; Math: 480 ...
  68. [68]
    SAT Nationally Representative and User Percentiles
    User group percentiles are based on the actual SAT scores of students that graduated in the past three school years.
  69. [69]
    [PDF] 2024 Total Group SAT Suite of Assessments Annual Report
    This report is compiled by the College Board as a summary of the SAT program results, inclusive of all test takers. In some states, the SAT is offered as an ...
  70. [70]
    Average SAT Score and More Statistics | BestColleges
    May 9, 2025 · Data Summary · In 2024, CollegeBoard reported that the average total SAT score was 1024, the lowest since the test changed format in 2016.<|separator|>
  71. [71]
    SAT Percentiles and Score Rankings (Updated 2025)
    What Are the Percentile Ranges for the SAT? ; SAT Composite Score, Percentile Score ; 1600-1570, 99+ ; 1560-1530, 99 ; 1520-1500, 98 ; 1490-1480, 97.
  72. [72]
    What Is a Good SAT Score? 2025 Guide - C2 Education
    Aug 7, 2025 · The average SAT score in 2024 was around 1050. This is the 50th percentile, meaning half of the students scored above and half below this number ...
  73. [73]
    [PDF] Average SAT Scores of College-Bound Seniors (1952 – present)
    For 1996 to 1999, nearly all students received scores on the recentered scale; any score on the original scale was converted to the recentered scale prior to.
  74. [74]
    Average SAT Scores Over Time: 1972–2024 - PrepScholar Blog
    What were the average SAT scores for 2023, 2022, 2021, and earlier? Find out in our historical guide to SAT averages back to 1972.
  75. [75]
    What is the Average SAT Score Over Time (And Why Does it Matter)?
    Mar 19, 2025 · In 2024, the average SAT score was 1024. Interestingly, this means the average SAT score was slightly lower than in 2023, when the average was 1028.Average SAT score in 2024 · Average SAT scores through...
  76. [76]
    Fast Facts: SAT scores (171)
    The SAT is a college admissions test taken by students in high school. The average SAT score of 2023 high school seniors taking the SAT was 1028 out of 1600.
  77. [77]
    A (Mostly) Brief History Of The SAT And ACT Tests - Erik Jacobsen
    Feb 20, 2025 · The College Board was founded in 1899. The first SAT was in 1926, designed to assess aptitude. The ACT average scores data starts from 1970.
  78. [78]
    Great to Good: The Diluted Value of High Test Scores
    Nov 12, 2018 · In the last 10 years, the number of students scoring 1400–1600 on the SAT or 31–36 on the ACT doubled. In just the last 5 years, the number of ...
  79. [79]
    SAT Score Curve: Standard Deviation & the Bell Curve
    Aug 7, 2025 · Explore the SAT score curve, standard deviation, and bell curve. Learn how raw scores are equated to scaled scores & percentile data.<|separator|>
  80. [80]
    [PDF] 2023 Total Group SAT Suite of Assessments Annual Report
    This report is compiled by the College Board as a summary of the SAT program results, inclusive of all test takers. In some states, the SAT is offered as an ...
  81. [81]
    History of the SAT - Wikipedia
    The test, owned by the College Board and originally developed by Carl Brigham, was first administered on June 23, 1926, to about 8,000 students.Timeline · 1926: First SAT administration · 1993: SAT renamed · 1997: SAT renamed
  82. [82]
    [PDF] Validity of the SAT® for Predicting First-Year Grades and Retention ...
    Analyses also demonstrate that SAT scores are useful for understanding whether students will be retained to the second year of college. In particular, findings.
  83. [83]
    Meta-Analysis of the Predictive Validity of Scholastic Aptitude Test ...
    Jan 1, 2016 · This study examined the effectiveness of SAT and ACT scores for predicting college students' first year GPA scores with a meta-analytic approach ...
  84. [84]
    SAT predicts GPA better for high ability subjects - PubMed Central
    This research examined the predictive validity of the SAT (formerly, the Scholastic Aptitude Test) for high and low ability groups.
  85. [85]
    None
    ### Key Findings on Predictive Validity of Digital SAT for First-Year College Outcomes
  86. [86]
    Scholastic Assessment or g? The relationship between ... - PubMed
    There is little evidence showing the relationship between the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) and g (general intelligence).
  87. [87]
    Scholastic Assessment or g? - Meredith C. Frey, Douglas K ...
    They found substantial general-factor loadings on both the math (.698) and the verbal (.804) SAT subtests. Because they used the SAT to develop their measure of ...
  88. [88]
    [PDF] Scholastic Assessment or g? - Gwern
    This research established the relationship between. SAT and g, as well as the appropriateness of the SAT as a measure of g, and examined the SAT as a premorbid ...<|separator|>
  89. [89]
    (PDF) What We Know, Are Still Getting Wrong, and Have Yet to ...
    Dec 2, 2019 · As noted earlier, the SAT correlates with general intelligence, g, about r = 0.73 to 0.82 (e.g., Coyle 2015; Frey 2019; Frey and Detterman 2004) ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  90. [90]
    Intelligence and school grades: A meta-analysis - ScienceDirect.com
    The present study investigated the population correlation between standardized intelligence tests and school grades employing psychometric meta-analysis.
  91. [91]
    Student Characteristics, Institutional Factors, and Outcomes in ...
    We examine the variance in student outcomes due to student (eg, cognitive aptitudes) versus institutional characteristics (eg, teachers, schools).
  92. [92]
    (PDF) A Case Study of the Correlation Between SAT Scores and ...
    Aug 7, 2025 · The results show a significant positive correlation between SAT scores and future incomes. This finding emphasizes the importance of academic performance in ...
  93. [93]
    [PDF] Fact and Fiction in Cognitive Ability Testing for Admissions and ...
    Consistent with research in academic domains, scores on cognitive ability tests are strongly related to success in occupational training in both civilian and ...
  94. [94]
    [PDF] Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth After 35 Years
    Because of SMPY's initial and short- term success with acceleration, and because the educational efficacy of acceleration has been documented repeatedly by.
  95. [95]
    (PDF) Long-term effects of educational acceleration - ResearchGate
    May 30, 2015 · Long-term benefits include obtaining advanced degrees at a higher rate than similar-ability non-accelerated gifted peers, higher salaries in ...
  96. [96]
    Job Hunting? Dig Up Those Old SAT Scores - WSJ
    Mar 25, 2014 · SATs and other academic artifacts remain relevant in part because they are easy—if imperfect—metrics for hiring managers to understand. This ...<|separator|>
  97. [97]
    Employers Who Use SATs As A Hiring Metric: Be Prepared - Forbes
    Mar 7, 2014 · Whether SAT scores accurately predict job performance is not clear. But it is clear that SAT scores differ markedly along racial lines, with ...Missing: screening | Show results with:screening
  98. [98]
    Importance of SAT/ACT for Service Academy Admissions - Kent Prep
    May 1, 2025 · SAT/ACT scores are critical for service academy admissions, assessing academic readiness and accounting for 40-45% of the admissions rubric.
  99. [99]
    Exploring the Relationship between Cognitive Ability Tilt and Job ...
    Feb 23, 2023 · A century of research has produced considerable evidence that intelligence predicts job performance across multiple jobs and settings (e.g., ...
  100. [100]
    What Is the Average SAT Score For High School Students?
    Nov 8, 2024 · Average SAT Score by Gender in 2023 ; Female, 50%, 1018, 522, 496 ; Male, 49%, 1029, 516, 514.
  101. [101]
    Boys, girls, and grades: Examining GPA and SAT trends
    Jan 14, 2025 · Boys score slightly higher at the average (1032 vs. 1023). They also make up a slight majority of test takers in both the highest (57%) and the ...
  102. [102]
    SAT mean scores of college-bound seniors, by sex: 1966-67 ...
    NOTE: Data for 1966-67 through 1970-71 are estimates derived from the test scores of all participants. Data for 1971-72 through 2009-10 are for seniors who took ...
  103. [103]
    Actually, 50 Years of Test Scores DO Confirm That Boys Outperform ...
    Oct 6, 2016 · It is therefore not surprising that females, on average, score somewhat lower than males. The gender gap is likely in large part a sampling ...
  104. [104]
    Test anxiety and performance-avoidance goals explain gender ... - NIH
    Indeed, data for the 20-year period from 1987 to 2006 indicates that the mean SAT-V score was 508 for males and 501 for females while the mean SAT-M score was ...<|separator|>
  105. [105]
    (PDF) Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of ...
    Aug 10, 2025 · PDF | The mean and standard deviation in performance on math test scores are only slightly larger for males than for females.
  106. [106]
    Gender gap variation across assessment types: Explanations and ...
    Turning to the gender gap in SAT scores, we find that among the selected sample of SAT takers, men have higher cognitive skills than women, especially along the ...
  107. [107]
    None
    ### Mean SAT Scores by Race/Ethnicity for Class of 2025
  108. [108]
    E(race)ing Inequities | The influence of race on SAT scores - EdNC
    Aug 28, 2019 · An analysis from 1976 by the College Board revealed that the average score for Black students was 240 points lower than White students. In 2018, ...
  109. [109]
    SAT mean scores of college-bound seniors, by race/ethnicity
    SAT mean scores of college-bound seniors, by race/ethnicity: Selected years, 1986-87 through 2012-13. Table 226.10.
  110. [110]
    Explaining Achievement Gaps: The Role of Socioeconomic Factors
    Aug 21, 2024 · Results show that a broad set of family SES factors explains a substantial portion of racial achievement gaps: between 34 and 64 percent of the ...
  111. [111]
    (PDF) The Black-White SAT Score Gap Increases with Education Level
    Jul 5, 2024 · This study investigates whether the magnitude of the Black-White difference in average SAT scores decreases as parental education increases.
  112. [112]
    [PDF] Race, Poverty and SAT Scores: Modeling the Influences of Family ...
    We clearly see in Table 2 that SAT scores increase monotonically as fam- ily income levels increase. Moreover, the correlation between family income and SAT ...
  113. [113]
    The SAT just measures your parents' income : r/badeconomics
    Jul 1, 2021 · Students from families earning more than $200,000 a year average a combined score of 1,714, while students from families earning under $20,000 a ...
  114. [114]
    What Is the Average SAT Score? - PrepScholar Blog
    The Average SAT Scores by Gender ; Female, 522, 496 ; Male, 516, 514 ; Another/No Response, 556, 511 ...
  115. [115]
    ED562860 - Socioeconomic Status and the Relationship ... - ERIC
    We examine relationships among SAT, SES, and freshman grades in 41 colleges and universities and show that (a) SES is related to SAT scores.
  116. [116]
    The role of socioeconomic status in SAT-grade relationships and in ...
    Sep 1, 2012 · This article examines the role of socioeconomic status (SES) in the relationships among college admissions-test scores, secondary school grades, and subsequent ...
  117. [117]
    Number, percentage distribution, and SAT mean scores of high ...
    This table reflects 2017, 2018, and 2019 high school graduates who took the new SAT during high school. The data in this table include only test takers from the ...
  118. [118]
    Family Background Accounts for 40% of SAT/ACT Scores Among ...
    May 11, 2020 · Family background factors like parental income, education, and race now account for over 40% of the variance in SAT/ACT scores among UC applicants.
  119. [119]
    The relationship between siblings' college choices: Evidence from ...
    Data on 1.6 million sibling pairs of SAT-takers reveals that younger and older siblings' choices are very closely related.<|separator|>
  120. [120]
    SAT Scores Differ by Type of School
    Oct 12, 2016 · Specifically, the average combined score of students in independent schools was 1645, or ... Public school students scored 1453, or 31 points shy ...Missing: data | Show results with:data
  121. [121]
    2018 SAT Results Released - League of Christian Schools
    Mean SAT scores for students in public schools were 529 in ERW and 520 in math, while comparable scores for students in religious schools were 581 and 572.<|separator|>
  122. [122]
    Public, Private, and Charter Schools Dashboard
    Explore the latest national results in all the NAEP subjects for students attending public, charter (a subset of public), private, and Catholic (a subset of ...
  123. [123]
    SAT History | Manhattan Review
    The SAT was intended to assess aptitude for learning rather than the received knowledge tested on the "College Boards." The Growth of the SAT through 1961. The ...
  124. [124]
    College Admissions Tests: A Brief History of ACT and SAT
    Aug 19, 2024 · It was developed by Carl Brigham, who was later a psychology professor at Princeton University and a fervent advocate of the eugenics movement.
  125. [125]
    [PDF] 1 A History of Achievement Testing in the United States Or - Ethan Hutt
    By 1960, roughly a million students were taking the SAT or ACT annually—a sign of how central the testing industry had become to mediating this key educational ...
  126. [126]
    THE AMERICAN WAY OF TESTING - The New York Times
    Sep 2, 1979 · But of the 1.4 million students who took the S.A.T. in 1977‐78, only 85,000 students wrote the essay. In the multiple‐choice English ...
  127. [127]
    [PDF] The Decline of Standardized Test Scores in the United - ERIC
    the SAT. In 1960, over half (55.4%) of the SAT takers were from the top. 20 percent on the Project Talent and National Longitudinal Study reading tests. In ...
  128. [128]
    [PDF] A Historical Perspective on the Content of the SAT - ERIC
    The 1994 redesign of the SAT took seriously the idea that changes in the test should have a positive influence on education and that a major task of stu- dents ...
  129. [129]
    [PDF] ERIC - ED 382651
    introduced Quantitative Comparisons in the SAT -M- -items that could be answered at a faster ratethe shortened test contained the same number of. SAT-M items ...
  130. [130]
    GROUP COMPARISONS FOR THE TEST OF STANDARD WRITTEN ...
    The TSWE was introduced, on an experimental basis, in 1974 as a part of the Admissions Testing Program (ATP) of the. College Entrance Examination Board. The ATP ...
  131. [131]
    [PDF] The Recentering of SAT Scales and Its Effects on Score Distributions ...
    The effects of recentering on scores of individuals and the 1990 Reference Group are also examined. We then discuss the effects of recentering on the ...
  132. [132]
    [PDF] The Effects of SAT Scale Recentering on Percentiles - ERIC
    Percentiles remain virtually unchanged after SAT recentering, though scores change. The verbal scale was adjusted more, while math was mostly unchanged. ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
  133. [133]
    How the SAT Has Changed Over the Past 90 Years - Business Insider
    Aug 9, 2019 · The SAT was created by The College Board 93 years ago to provide colleges with a metric to narrow down applicants. · The exam originated from an ...Missing: expansions | Show results with:expansions
  134. [134]
    History of the SAT: Its Many Failures and Controversies
    Learn about SAT history, the many problems of College Board since its founding, and where it plans to go.
  135. [135]
    College Board unveils new SAT, with major overhaul for writing exam
    Mar 4, 2014 · The writing section was added in 2005 after a revision of the test prompted by a speech in 2001 in which Richard Atkinson, then-president of the ...
  136. [136]
    The ?New? SAT 2005: A Better Test or Just a Marketing Tool?
    Modeled after the current SAT II: Writing Test, the new section of the SAT-I will included 35 minutes of multiple-choice, copy editing questions and one short ...
  137. [137]
    2nd SAT Dip in Row Stirs Debate on 2005 Revision - Education Week
    Sep 4, 2007 · On a scale of 200 to 800 points, the average scores dropped 1 point on the critical-reading section, to 502; 3 points in mathematics, to 515; ...
  138. [138]
    The Story Behind the SAT Overhaul - The New York Times
    Mar 6, 2014 · How the College Board revolutionized the most controversial exam in America.
  139. [139]
    The SAT Trap - American Federation of Teachers
    Steele has documented that, as a result, minority students freeze up when taking any high-stakes test. Excessive public SAT-talk, then, damages the life chances ...
  140. [140]
    Digital SAT Brings Student-Friendly Changes to Test Experience
    Jan 25, 2022 · Among the changes: the digital SAT will be shorter—about two hours instead of three for the current SAT, with more time per question. The ...Missing: implementation | Show results with:implementation
  141. [141]
    SAT Goes Digital in 2024: Everything You Need to Know About the ...
    The College Board, responsible for the SAT, has announced that the test will be fully digital starting on March 9, 2024, setting a precedent for future ...
  142. [142]
    Everything You Need to Know About the Digital SAT
    Jan 4, 2024 · You'll take the SAT on a laptop or tablet. You'll take a shorter test, about 2 hours instead of 3. Find out how adaptive testing makes this ...
  143. [143]
    The New Digital SAT - Compass Education Group
    Rollout Timeline​​ College Board offered an international digital SAT in March 2023. In the U.S., the PSAT changed to digital in October 2023, with the SAT ...
  144. [144]
    New Digital SAT Format vs. Old Paper SAT Format (2024) - Magoosh
    Oct 31, 2024 · You'll have roughly 2 hours and 15 minutes to answer 98 total questions. The test is split into two sections: Reading & Writing and Math. Each ...<|separator|>
  145. [145]
    SAT Participation Continues To Grow As The SAT Suite Successfully ...
    Sep 24, 2024 · The 2023-24 school year marked the transition to digital testing in the United States, including the PSAT/NMSQT® in fall 2023 and the launch of ...
  146. [146]
    Digital SAT 2025 Guide: Format & Scoring - keySkillset
    Oct 13, 2025 · Learn Digital SAT 2025 format, scoring, dates, and College Board updates. Prep tips and practice tests to boost your score.
  147. [147]
    Fully digital SAT's new 'adaptive' sections dumb down college ...
    Mar 6, 2024 · Students taking the SAT this week will see some hi-tech changes as the college admissions exam goes fully digital and adopts an “adaptive” testing method.
  148. [148]
    [PDF] Digital SAT Suite of Assessments Technical Manual
    The following individuals were involved in the creation of the Digital SAT Suite of Assessments Technical Manual. We thank them for sharing so generously of ...
  149. [149]
    Wide gap in SAT/ACT test scores between wealthy, lower-income kids
    Nov 22, 2023 · Children of the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans were 13 times likelier than the children of low-income families to score 1300 or higher on SAT/ACT tests.
  150. [150]
    SAT To Score Students' 'Disadvantages' To Try To Even The Playing ...
    May 16, 2019 · The new SAT score is based on factors such as average family income, educational attainment, housing stability and crime.
  151. [151]
    [PDF] NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES STANDARDIZED TEST SCORES ...
    Mar 14, 2025 · Standardized test scores predict academic outcomes four times more strongly than high school GPA, and show no bias against less advantaged ...
  152. [152]
    The University of California Was Wrong to Abolish the SAT ...
    Feb 9, 2024 · Across time and across universities, empirical studies have shown that students from low SES families and underrepresented minorities on ...
  153. [153]
    The Most Infamous Example of Cultural Bias on the SAT
    Dec 8, 2016 · This test question was famously dissected in the controversial 1994 book, The Bell Curve, by Herrnstein and Murray.
  154. [154]
    Study: SAT is equally predictive across the socioeconomic spectrum
    Sep 14, 2012 · Students from wealthier families, on average, perform better on the SAT than those from low-income families. And that reality has led some ...Missing: psychometric | Show results with:psychometric
  155. [155]
    Essay content and style are strongly related to household income ...
    Oct 13, 2021 · After stratifying our data by household income decile, we found that essay content and style remained predictive of SAT score (see Fig. 3).
  156. [156]
    ERIC - EJ275753 - Evaluating the Effect of Coaching on SAT Scores
    Evaluating the Effect of Coaching on SAT Scores: A Meta-Analysis. DerSimonian, Rebecca; Laird, Nan M. Harvard Educational Review , v53 n1 p1-15 Feb 1983.
  157. [157]
    Coaching for the SAT: A Summary of the Summaries and an Update
    Aug 6, 2025 · ... Early meta-analyses estimated that the average improvement associated with coaching was around 10 points on the math and verbal SAT subtests ...
  158. [158]
    COACHING FOR THE SAT - Wiley Online Library
    Recently, meta-analysis has been applied to studying the effects of special preparation for standardized tests, including the SAT. In fact, several summaries ...Missing: peer- | Show results with:peer-
  159. [159]
    [PDF] The Effect of Admissions Test Preparation: Evidence from NELS:88
    May 1, 2007 · On average coached students do improve their SAT scores slightly more than uncoached students. The question that must be addressed is whether.
  160. [160]
    [PDF] Examining the Relationship Between Digital SAT Practice in ...
    Students who practice for the SAT tend to earn higher scores than students who do not practice.
  161. [161]
    Exam ready: Who uses college admissions test prep and does it work?
    Jul 15, 2025 · In this report, we review the evidence on who uses test preparation (or “test prep”) and how effective it is at improving scores.
  162. [162]
    [PDF] SAT Coaching, Bias and Causal Inference by Derek Christian Briggs
    This study considers the extent to which unbiased causal inferences can be drawn about the effect of coaching on SAT performance. Following a review ...
  163. [163]
    [PDF] Effects of Coaching on SAT I: Reasoning Scores - ERIC
    “Evaluating the effect of coaching on SAT scores: A meta-analysis.” Harvard Educational Review 53: 1–5. Greene, W. H. (1997). Econometric Analysis. Upper ...
  164. [164]
    Effects of Test-Optional Policies | ACT Newsroom
    This document outlines key information and research that is relevant to understanding the effects of test-optional policies.
  165. [165]
    [PDF] NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES HOW TEST OPTIONAL ...
    We find that test score optional policies harm the likelihood of elite college admission for high achieving applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds.
  166. [166]
    [PDF] Investigating the Effects of Test-Optional Admissions Policies - ERIC
    Although previous studies analyzed the impact of test-optional admissions policies across time, research has not addressed test-optional outcomes since. 2016 ...
  167. [167]
    Test-Optional Policies: A Review of Recent Research
    Jan 31, 2022 · NCAN reviewed six recent research studies that explore the implications of test-optional policies on admission trends, enrollment and graduation outcomes, and ...
  168. [168]
    Test-Optional Policies Failed to Boost Underrepresented Student ...
    Sep 23, 2025 · The study highlighted how test-optional policies may have inadvertently created new barriers. First-generation students were less likely to ...
  169. [169]
    GW has higher graduation rates, diversity 10 years after adopting ...
    Aug 18, 2025 · Ten years after GW shifted to test-optional admissions, experts and officials say the policy has led to more diverse applicants and higher ...
  170. [170]
    Standardized Test Scores and Academic Performance at Ivy-Plus ...
    This implies that standardized test scores are four times more predictive of academic achievement in college than high school grades. Third, standardized test ...Missing: studies | Show results with:studies
  171. [171]
    Test Scores More Accurately Predict Course Placement and College ...
    Jan 28, 2025 · A new May 2024 research study by the ACT organization shows that test scores determine placement for remedial courses more accurately than high school grades.
  172. [172]
    Research Notes: The Impact of Test-Optional Policies on College ...
    Oct 2, 2025 · Applicants who submitted test scores were admitted at higher rates and received larger average scholarship packages, though the number of ...
  173. [173]
    How Test Optional Policies in College Admissions ...
    Jan 23, 2025 · We find that test score optional policies harm the likelihood of elite college admission for high achieving applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds.
  174. [174]
    [PDF] Advancing Equity by Rethinking the Use of Tests in College ...
    Colleges with test-optional policies allow, but do not require, students to submit SAT or ACT scores as part of their applications. Test-optional policies are ...
  175. [175]
    The Debate Over Test- Optional Policies at Elite Colleges Continues
    Mar 20, 2024 · Researchers reviewed nearly 100 private institutions and found that test-optional policies were associated with increases of 3%-4% for Pell ...<|separator|>
  176. [176]
    The Misguided War on the SAT - The New York Times
    Jan 7, 2024 · Research has increasingly shown that standardized test scores contain real information, helping to predict college grades, chances of graduation and post- ...Missing: 1990s- | Show results with:1990s-
  177. [177]
    Yale, Dartmouth starts requiring SAT, ACT test scores for admission ...
    Feb 25, 2024 · The decision comes after the Supreme Court gutted affirmative action in 2023, ruling colleges and universities could no longer take race into ...
  178. [178]
    Harvard Reinstates Standardized Testing For Class of 2029
    Sep 18, 2025 · Harvard University announced the reinstatement of SAT/ACT testing requirements for the class of 2029, retracting its previous commitment to ...<|separator|>
  179. [179]
    Lawsuit Claims SAT And ACT Are Illegal In California Admissions
    Dec 10, 2019 · A lawsuit expected to be filed Tuesday is challenging the University of California system's use of the SAT or ACT as a requirement for admission.
  180. [180]
    Ethical College Admissions: A New Challenge to Testing
    Nov 3, 2019 · The first is that the SAT and ACT discriminate against underrepresented minority students, multilingual students and students with disabilities.
  181. [181]
    How standardized tests became part of the DEI debate
    Mar 11, 2025 · The Trump administration highlighted test-optional admissions policies alongside race-based scholarships and affirmative action in recent anti-DEI guidance.
  182. [182]
    A Civil Rights Challenge to Standardized Testing in College ...
    Nov 12, 2019 · In their letter, they allege that the SAT and ACT are little more than a proxy for race and wealth and should play no role in college admissions ...