This study examines the relationship between test-optional undergraduate admissions policies and two common student success metrics: the retention rate for first-year students and the 6-year graduation rate for bachelor’s students. Using a difference-in-differences analytic approach designed to account for the staggered nature of policy adoption, I find that test-optional policies adopted prior to the COVID-19 pandemic were not associated with statistically significant changes in institution-level retention and graduation rates overall. However, subgroup analyses by institutional selectivity indicate that test-optional policy enactment was associated with a 2 percentage point increase in graduation rates for men, women, and White students at institutions with more competitive admissions but a 2 percentage point decrease in graduation rates for White students at institutions with less competitive admissions.
AltonjiJ. G.HuangC. I.TaberC. R. (2015). Estimating the cream skimming effect of school choice. Journal of Political Economy, 123(2), 266–324.
2.
BastedoM.KappR.BaiY.CarrollS. (2026). Dodging the competency trap? How admissions and financial aid offices adapted to test-optional policies after COVID-19. The Journal of Higher Education, 97(1), 148–172.
3.
BastedoM. N.UmbrichtM.BauschE.ByunB. K.BaiY. (2023). Contextualized high school performance: Evidence to inform equitable holistic, test-optional, and test-free admissions policies. AERA Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584231197413
4.
BelascoA. S.RosingerK. O.HearnJ. C. (2015). The test-optional movement at America’s selective liberal arts colleges: A boon for equity or something else?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(2), 206–223.
5.
BennettC. T. (2022). Untested admissions: Examining changes in application behaviors and student demographics under test-optional policies. American Educational Research Journal, 59(1), 180–216.
6.
BowmanN. A.DensonN. (2014). A missing piece of the departure puzzle: Student–institution fit and intent to persist. Research in Higher Education, 55, 123–142.
CallawayB.Sant’AnnaP. H. (2021). Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods. Journal of Econometrics, 225(2), 200–230.
9.
CamaraW. J.MatternK. (2022). Inflection point: The role of testing in admissions decisions in a postpandemic environment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 41(1), 10–15.
10.
ChenX.SanchezE. I. (2024). Has the predictive validity of high school GPA and ACT scores on postsecondary enrollment changed over time?ACT, Inc.
11.
De ChaisemartinC.d’HaultfoeuilleX. (2023). Two-way fixed effects and differences-in-differences with heterogeneous treatment effects: A survey. The Econometrics Journal, 26(3), C1–C30.
12.
EdwardsA.GoyerP.HowellJ.HurwitzM.ImlayS.PerfettoG. (2023). College outcomes following pandemic-induced changes in college admissions policies: Focus on 2021-22 first-year outcomes. College Board.
13.
FurutaJ. (2017). Rationalization and student/school personhood in US college admissions: The rise of test-optional policies, 1987 to 2015. Sociology of Education, 90(3), 236–254.
14.
Goodman-BaconA. (2021). Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing. Journal of Econometrics, 225(2), 254–277.
15.
Huntington-KleinN. (2021). The effect: An introduction to research design and causality. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
MullinC. M. (2012). Student success: Institutional and individual perspectives. Community College Review, 40(2), 126–144.
18.
ParkJ. J.KimB. H.WongN.ZhengJ.BreenS.LoP.BakerD. J.RosingerK. O.NguyenM. H.PoonO. (2025). Inequality beyond standardized tests: Trends in extracurricular activity reporting in college applications across race and class. American Educational Research Journal, 62(2), 336–377.
19.
Rios-AvilaF.Sant’AnnaP.CallawayB. (2023). CSDID: Stata module for the estimation of difference-in-difference models with multiple time periods. Statistical Software Components.
20.
RosingerK.BakerD. J.SturmJ.YuW.ParkJ. J.PoonO.KimB. H.BreenS. (2024). Exploring the relationship between test-optional admissions and selectivity and enrollment outcomes during the pandemic (EdWorkingPaper No. 24-982). Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/nv5h-pt11
21.
RothJ.Sant’AnnaP. H.BilinskiA.PoeJ. (2023). What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature. Journal of Econometrics, 235(2), 2218–2244.
22.
SaboeM.TerrizziS. (2019). SAT optional policies: Do they influence graduate quality, selectivity or diversity?Economics Letters, 174, 13–17.
SlayK.AddisonA.DickasonC. (2022, March17–19). Exploring the work of college admissions professionals: Administrative burden and (in)equity in the era of COVID-19 [Conference presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Association for Education Finance and Policy. Denver, CO, United States.
25.
TillinghastJ. A.MjeldeD. J. W.YeritsyanA. (2023). COVID-19 and grade inflation: Analysis of undergraduate GPAs during the pandemic. SAGE Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231209110
26.
WadeN. L. (2019). Measuring, manipulating, and predicting student success: A 10-year assessment of Carnegie R1 doctoral universities between 2004 and 2013. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 21(1), 119–141.
27.
WestrickP. A.LeH.RobbinsS. B.RadunzelJ. M.SchmidtF. L. (2015). College performance and retention: A meta-analysis of the predictive validities of ACT® scores, high school grades, and SES. Educational Assessment, 20(1), 23–45.
28.
WongN.PoonO.ParkJ. J.ZhengJ.LoP. (2023). Test-optional policies in the era of COVID-19: Responses from the college admissions community. College Admissions Futures Co-Laborative.
