Texas has expanded competition in college admissions testing. On July 22, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board determined that the Classic Learning Test meets the same standards of rigor and reliability as the SAT and ACT. The board is moving forward with rulemaking to include the CLT as an accepted admissions exam for the state’s public universities.
Texas joins the public university systems of Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Arkansas, Georgia, and North Carolina, along with the Universities of Oklahoma and New Mexico, and the US Service Academies.
This expansion of test choice is essential to restoring merit in higher education admissions. For decades, the College Board and ACT have operated as a near-duopoly. That concentrated power allows them to lower standards over time with little consequence. Students and families face intense pressure to post the highest possible scores for admission to selective colleges. When the primary tests control the market, the incentives tilt toward making the exams easier rather than better at distinguishing students by true academic ability.
The SAT has undergone repeated softening. In 1995, the College Board recentered scores, inflating results so that previously rare high marks became far more common. Analogies and antonym questions that demanded precise verbal reasoning disappeared. The 2016 redesign eliminated the guessing penalty, further boosting scores. The new digital SAT shortens reading passages from several hundred words to as few as 25, grants more time per question, and adapts difficulty mid-test.
Research using large language models as consistent test-takers has documented a clear decline in math section rigor over the past 15 years. These changes make it harder for colleges to separate genuinely high-ability students from those who simply benefited from an easier instrument.
High-school grade inflation compounds the problem. Nearly half of seniors now graduate with A-range GPAs, up sharply from earlier decades, even as national assessments show stagnant or declining proficiency in reading and math. Admissions officers relying on inflated transcripts and softened standardized scores are impaired in their ability to identify students who are prepared for rigorous college work.
A competitive market of entrance exams begins to invert these pressures. Colleges that want to admit students capable of excelling will favor tests that actually differentiate. Providers that maintain high standards and predictive validity will gain market share. Providers that dilute content will lose market share. The Classic Learning Test, with its emphasis on classic texts, grammar, and quantitative reasoning, offers one clear alternative. Its growth already demonstrates demand for assessments that reward genuine academic preparation rather than score inflation.
Test choice pairs naturally with school choice. Families who can select schools that prioritize rigorous classical or traditional curricula produce graduates ready for demanding college work. Those same families then need a testing marketplace that accurately signals their children’s readiness. When both K–12 and college admissions operate under competition, educational attainment rises and students find better fits for the next stage of life, whether university or career.
Competition also guards against ideological capture. A monopolistic testing organization can embed progressive assumptions with limited accountability. The College Board has repeatedly revealed such leanings. Its initial pilot framework for Advanced Placement African American Studies incorporated queer theory, intersectionality, and Black Lives Matter as core content before political pushback forced revisions.
The organization publicly criticized the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision ending racial preferences in admissions. Earlier AP US History (APUSH) frameworks drew criticism from dozens of historians for downplaying American ideals and elevating transnational critiques. When one entity dominates both admissions testing and high-school advanced coursework, these biases shape the entire pipeline. Multiple independent exams force every provider to focus on objective academic measurement or lose customers.
Expanding the Classic Learning Test further strengthens this competitive discipline. Additional state university systems should follow Texas and recognize the CLT on equal terms. Doing so gives classical and homeschool students a fair shot at public institutions while pressuring the incumbent tests to raise their own standards. Policymakers can accelerate the process by ensuring scholarship programs and automatic admissions pathways treat all rigorous exams equally. Private colleges already accepting the CLT have shown the model works; public systems should not lag.
A marketplace of tests rewards excellence instead of gaming. Students prepare for the most accurate measure of ability. Colleges receive clearer signals. Families gain tools that align with the schools they choose. The Texas decision is a concrete step toward that system. Other states should follow Texas’s example.
