For decades, the ACT and SAT have carried the reputation of being academic “equalizers,” tests designed to measure academic ability rather than background. But as the college admissions process–and the multimillion-dollar test prep industry–continue to evolve, so does the question: are these exams truly measuring intelligence or simply opportunity?
In a 2023 Opportunity Insights study on ACT and SAT scores, a Harvard-based team of researchers and policy analysts found that 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.
“For children from the bottom 20 % of the income distribution, only about a quarter of them take an SAT or ACT test,” wrote David Deming, the Isabelle and Scott Black Professor of Political Economy at Harvard Kennedy School, in the Harvard Gazette. “Among those, only about 2.5 % score 1300 or higher.”
These statistics reflect a national trend of economic disparity in relation to test scores, but the gap isn’t just visible in national research; it’s evident in Chicagoland. To better understand how access and opportunity affect standardized testing, I spoke with two high school students from different neighborhoods, each with their own experience preparing for and taking the ACT/SAT.
Clare Moroney, a senior at OPRF, chose to take the ACT seriously after learning that some of the colleges she was applying to–predominantly in the South–were requiring test scores. “I did test prep at Huntington because I knew some of my schools were requiring test scores,” she explained. “In order to submit a score in their range, I knew I needed to test well.”
She viewed test prep as an investment in her college chances, though not an easy one. “It definitely helps your application,” she said, “but it’s kind of costly. It really comes down to whether you can afford to pay for test prep. I feel like it’s mainly a financial thing–you’re kind of buying your way into getting a better score.”
Despite the benefits, she questioned whether standardized tests measure what truly matters. “I just think it’s not a very accurate [measure] of the student as a whole,” she added. “Things like extracurriculars, GPA, and the courses you take say a lot more. And the way people do test prep really affects their scores–it can influence them too much.”
The advantages of paid test prep highlight only one side of the story. For students like Destiny Vega, a senior who attends Rauner College Prep on Chicago’s West Side, the challenges go beyond a lack of resources–they reveal how deeply class and opportunity shape students’ experiences with standardized testing.
“It was something the school talked about with us, and I felt like I needed to do it,” Vega said. “The second time I took the ACT, I actually got a lower score, and it made me feel like I never wanted to take it again.”
For Vega, the experience of taking the ACT was closely tied to larger issues of class and inequality. “There are different classes in our world and in our system,” she said. “Some people don’t have the extra money to even pay for an ACT beyond their school-administered one, while others can afford to take it 10 times. Those kids will always have more opportunities because of the advantages they have. It’s not a fair game–it’s so normalized that people overlook it.”
Still, she emphasized the importance of taking advantage of the limited support available. “It depends on the student and if they want to take the support or not,” Vega added. “Personally, I took all the support I could get. I do believe that your test scores and report cards are like your paycheck in the future.”
Vega also reflected on her peers. “I know a lot of students who never had people who cared,” she said. “So they don’t care either–they never took any of the advantages or support that were provided.”
The ACT and SAT were meant to equalize opportunity, yet they’ve become symbols of the inequality they sought to erase. It’s easy to dismiss these exams as “wealth tests,” but that would be an oversimplification of the issue at hand.
In 2025, everything in the college admissions process–from essays to extracurriculars–is tied to wealth, not just standardized tests. Making tests optional doesn’t erase disparities; it simply hides them. The underlying issue is unequal preparation and opportunity before students even reach the test.
While standardized tests can disadvantage low-income students who lack access to preparation, they can also give academically talented students from those same backgrounds a chance to stand out. Without them, some students could lose one of the few objective ways to distinguish themselves in the admissions process.
The solution doesn’t lie in eliminating standardized tests, but in confronting the systemic inequities behind them–from underfunded schools and underpaid teachers to the uneven distribution of academic support. Real progress requires expanding economic and educational resources and urging colleges to evaluate applicants through a more holistic lens that captures every part of a student’s journey, not just the number on a score report.
