While I applaud the effort to remove the requirement of SAT or ACT in college admission, sooner or later, another test will take its place, either developed by the College Board or the universities themselves.

However inefficient standard test is in evaluating a student's academic potential, it is nevertheless one of the fairest ways to give everyone a chance for social mobility. I am, of course, biased, because I have experienced the gigantic college entrance examination in China where poor and underprivileged kids can sit next to kids from the elites in the same classroom of a prestigious college as long as they work their butts off and have stellar performance in the exam.

Granted, the college admission process in the US cannot be more different from that in China, but the value of standard test should not be understated. As noted in the article: "You can't deny a 1590 on SATs". I can only imagine what more shenanigans are going to happen if the admission process is purely based on soft qualities, such as extracurricular activities, leadership, etc. I would go so far as to say that admission without taking into account the SAT (or whatever test) score will bias against the underprivileged students even more, as they have less exposure to the opportunities that can boost the soft qualities universities tend to like.

Therefore, instead of eliminating SAT and ACT, or finding alternatives to them, why not incentivize schools to offer free tutoring on taking these exams? The rich kids will obtain more test preps. That's inevitable. But at least we can ensure that the poor kids have access to decent test preps as well. To me, that would level the playing ground much more than doing away with standard tests all together.