Surprise! (You have to know math to do science! Who knew?)

Back around pandemic time, UC (really the UC Regents) abandoned the SAT for undergraduate admissions. This step was taken despite the recommendations of an Academic Senate task force that it be retained as one of a group of criteria for admissions. UC never had an SAT-only policy. At the time, other universities took similar steps, although some have returned to testing.

The impetus for dropping testing at UC was the idea that testing impeded diversity. However, the Senate report had noted that the way the SAT was used at UC did not have that effect. Again, UC never had an SAT-only policy. 

The first (public) sign of trouble was a recent report from UC-San Diego math faculty that incoming students lacked basic high school math skills.* Now, from the LA Times:

More than 600 University of California faculty members, led by mathematicians at UC Berkeley, are calling on the system to reinstate standardized testing requirements for science, technology, engineering and mathematics applicants, saying that six years of test-free admissions has not reliably assessed readiness and professors are often teaching middle school math to incoming students. Without standardized testing in admissions, professors said they don’t know whether incoming students can handle college-level math. The open letter, addressed to top UC leaders, asks for SAT or ACT exams to be required beginning in fall 2027 and for STEM faculty to be given formal oversight of readiness standards in their majors...**

====

Text of letter:

To the UC Regents, UCOP, Academic Senate leadership, and the people of California:

We write as University of California mathematics faculty, joined by faculty from other STEM disciplines. UC has long served students from every background and has been a powerful engine of social mobility for the people of California. That public trust must be protected for future generations. Today, UC’s mission is at risk. To preserve that mission:

We call for the reinstatement of the SAT/ACT mathematics requirement for applicants to STEM majors beginning with the 2027 admissions cycle, alongside STEM faculty oversight of readiness standards and admissions practices affecting those majors.

Over the past five years, we have seen a widening divergence in mathematical preparation levels within the same classroom. This trend indicates that current admissions practices do not provide a sufficiently reliable check on mathematical readiness for STEM majors. The UC San Diego Senate–Administration Workgroup on Admissions report documents this crisis in stark terms: in the last five years, the number of students whose mathematics skills fall below high school level increased nearly thirtyfold; moreover, 70% of those students fall below middle school levels, reaching roughly one in twelve members of the entering cohort. These findings are corroborated by data across our campuses. For example, for three consecutive years, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe preparation deficits.

Basic mathematical fluency is analogous to literacy; without it, success in university-level STEM becomes structurally unattainable for students. We now observe preparation gaps so severe that instructors must reteach middle-school mathematics while simultaneously teaching the material students need for sciences, engineering, economics, and other quantitatively demanding fields. UC has been a national leader in supporting under-resourced students to do well in mathematics. However, UC has finite resources and can help only so many students, and only when the preparation deficits they need to overcome are within reach.

Furthermore, the widening spread between underprepared and well-prepared students creates polarized courses, weakening the foundation available to many students and making it harder to teach at the level required for advanced STEM work. UC is increasingly unable to provide its students with the education needed to become leaders in California’s scientific, technological, and economic future. We are already seeing the warning signs: longer pathways through prerequisite material, reduced readiness for advanced coursework, and growing pressure to dilute quantitative rigor. Left unaddressed, these trends will lead to declining graduation rates, longer time to degree, and reduced completion of STEM majors, with consequences for California’s highly skilled STEM workforce.

California’s public higher-education system is a coordinated pathway through community college, CSU, and UC that aligns students with the instruction best suited to their preparation.

The current admissions system is undermining this structure by admitting students directly into STEM UC programs without a reliable measure of whether they are prepared to succeed. This serves no one well.

The widening abilities gap followed the 2020 elimination of the SAT/ACT, a temporary measure that has now become a permanent vulnerability. This outcome was explicitly predicted by the Academic Senate’s 2020 Standardized Testing Task Force (STTF) report, which warned that removing these tests would eliminate a vital predictor of college success and obscure the impact of severe high-school grade inflation. Unfortunately, the outcomes cautioned against in that report have now materialized in the data across our campuses. All other leading STEM institutions, including the UC’s primary peers, have resumed using SAT/ACT in their admissions to ensure foundational fluency. For the University of California to remain a global leader in STEM, it is essential to restore these objective benchmarks.

Rather than measuring advanced mathematical ability, the SAT/ACT tests provide a critical baseline: a common external check that students have the core mathematical fluency required for university-level STEM coursework. SAT/ACT scores can also identify high-potential students in under-resourced schools whose talent might otherwise go unrecognized because of limited access to advanced coursework.

The SAT/ACT mathematics requirement is not an obstacle to equity; rather, it is a prerequisite for it. Failing to measure preparation gaps does not remove barriers; it moves them into the classroom, where they become harder to overcome. An admissions process that ignores foundational readiness does a disservice to the most vulnerable students. True access requires an honest assessment of the support students need and where, within California’s public higher-education system, they can best receive it.

The current admissions metrics, based primarily on GPA and essays, can no longer reliably distinguish readiness for university-level STEM majors in an era of severe grade inflation and AI-assisted application essays. We therefore call upon the University of California to:

1. Reinstate SAT/ACT Requirements: Require SAT/ACT mathematics scores for applicants to STEM-intensive majors, effective with the 2027 cycle.

2. Validate Academic Readiness: Use these scores as a common measure of basic readiness to provide a necessary counterweight to inconsistent high-school grades.

3. Establish Faculty Oversight: Ensure STEM faculty oversight of readiness standards and of admissions policies that materially affect STEM programs.

4. Mandate Institutional Accountability: Test admissions criteria against student outcomes, and revise them if they fail to predict readiness.

Obscuring preparation gaps harms both students individually and the University collectively. It offers the appearance of access while undermining the chance of success. UC must ensure that every student is challenged appropriately, supported in closing real gaps, and given a path toward a degree that retains its full value in the global economy. Restoring objective data and introducing faculty oversight will allow the University to support students effectively, provide institutional accountability, and preserve the standards that make a UC STEM degree meaningful.

Source: https://ucstudentsuccess.org/. About 70 UCLA faculty signed the letter.

===

Note: Not addressed in the letter is the significance of having two tracks of admission. Those who want to pursue STEM fields (and maybe some others such as economics) would have to submit SAT scores. Those who want to be admitted to study other fields would not have a testing requirement. Many high school grads don't have firm ideas about future studies or careers. Many change their minds after they enroll.

Finally, there is the larger issue of why K-12 California students are graduating without basic skills.

===

*https://www.kpbs.org/news/education/2025/12/02/uc-san-diego-is-trying-to-solve-a-remedial-math-problem.

**Full story at https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-05-27/uc-math-professors-demand-return-of-sat-for-stem-admissions.

Might be Legit

Yours truly has been told that some UC employees and emeriti/retirees may be eligible for some funds due to an antitrust settlement with Blue Cross and Blue Shield.

Info at https://www.bcbssettlement.com/.

If you are eligible, you might get some kind of notice of such a settlement. 

Even though the settlement is real, there could be scams associated with it. If you get an email or text about claiming benefits, be cautious about clicking directly on the message or calling phone numbers directly on the message.

Straws in the Wind - Part 355

From the Chronicle of Higher Education: ...The University of Oregon announced Thursday that a “significantly lower” number of first-year out-of-state students have enrolled for next academic year, resulting in $65 million in necessary cuts. The university will also freeze hiring and pay, and limit non-essential travel.

President Karl Scholz had warned last month that cuts may be on the way, noting that the competition for out-of-state students was “fiercer than it has ever been.” At the time he also cited international-enrollment challenges and “rising costs due to geopolitical tensions.” ...

Full story at https://www.chronicle.com/liveblog/finance-live-updates-union-warns-layoffs-are-coming-to-muhlenberg-college.

Dissolving a Bond?

According to the Daily Bruin, the chancellor will deal with a deficit in the athletics program by "dissolving a bond." Does anyone have any idea what that means in this context? Now, I've heard of floating a bond. But you don't normally float (offer to sell) new bonds to deal with an ongoing budget deficit. I've also heard of "the bonds that tie," but not ones that dissolve.

Poking around on the web, yours truly found that "dissolving a bond" might mean selling bonds that you already own as part of your financial assets. So what bonds is UCLA holding that it plans to "dissolve"?* Basically, if selling off assets is being used to finance a deficit, it doesn't really matter what assets are being cashed in. What matters is that you are running down assets (reserves) which can't go on forever.

The Bruin also talks about a campus-wide "deficit." But without a complete financial statement, who knows what that means? The last time we had a financial statement was when then-CFO Agostini produced one. But then he was quickly fired for saying some Very Bad Words, as blog readers will know. And, as blog readers will further know, his estimates for revenue and expenditure were as of last September. Presumably, someone has updates. Or maybe not. As we have also noted on this blog, it is not clear that Murphy Hall has the ability to produce up-to-date numbers.

Excerpts from the Bruin:

UCLA will dissolve a $50 million bond to reduce UCLA Athletics department’s budget deficit and consolidate its chief financial officer and administrative vice chancellor roles, Chancellor Julio Frenk announced in a Tuesday morning State of the Campus address. Frenk outlined a three-step plan to address UCLA’s financial shortfalls at the inaugural address, which university administrators, student government leaders, faculty and UC Office of the President representatives attended. Frenk said in the speech that curtailed state and federal funding and rising operational costs impacted UCLA’s finances...

The consolidation of administrative roles [of CFO and Administrative Vice Chancellor] comes as Administrative Vice Chancellor Michael Beck announced that he will retire at the end of 2026. Frenk said the university hopes to increase efficiency with the combination of offices...

UCLA is projected to generate a $220 million budget deficit for the 2025-26 academic year, UCLA’s Interim CFO Reem Hanna-Harwell said in a March 26 campuswide email. Hanna-Harwell’s figure came more than a month after former CFO Stephen Agostini alleged to the Daily Bruin that financial mismanagement from administrators led to a projected $425 million deficit for the same year...

Frenk also said the university is reviewing its real estate holdings, including by evaluating the financial performance and longevity of university-owned properties and seeking out opportunities to diversify its holdings...

Full story at https://dailybruin.com/2026/05/26/ucla-to-combine-administrative-roles-give-ucla-athletics-50-million-frenk-says.

===

PS: Just a final question: Did any of the "university administrators, student government leaders, faculty and UC Office of the President representatives" who attended the talk ask what dissolving a bond means or, more importantly, what the heck is going on with UCLA's budget?

===

*According to the chancellor's speech, some funds from past litigation are being held in the form of bonds. https://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/julio-frenk-2026-state-of-the-campus-full-speech.

IT workers unionize at UC

From the San Francisco Chronicle: As AI continues to shake up the tech sector and fuel mass layoffs, more than 2,000 University of California IT and technical workers have voted to unionize, expanding what organizers say is now the largest tech worker union in the U.S.

University Professional and Technical Employees-CWA 9119 said Thursday that 2,100 IT and technical employees across the UC system voted to join the union, bringing the union’s tech bargaining unit to about 8,400 workers... 

The newly represented tech workers include application programmers, business systems analysts, data systems analysts, database administrators and other IT workers, the union said...

Full story at https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/uc-tech-worker-union-california-22269143.php.

Straws in the Wind - Part 354

From Science: Grants managers at two of the U.S. government’s largest funders of scientific research have recently placed unprecedented limitations on the ability of U.S. scientists to publish with co-authors from other countries, researchers say. Units of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are privately directing grantees to request permission in advance for any co-authorship with a scholar affiliated with a foreign institution, even if all the work was done in the United States. NASA, meanwhile, is reportedly telling some grantees that papers co-authored with researchers in China may have violated its rules.

Neither agency has publicly issued new formal guidance describing these requirements. Instead, officials are informing grantees individually, leaving researchers confused and concerned. In several cases, NIH grantees say they have been asked to remove published papers with foreign co-authors from annual progress reports to the agency. Observers say the policy creates an incentive to preemptively remove foreign co-authors from forthcoming papers.

...Since at least 2003, NIH has required U.S.-based investigators to obtain agency approval before publishing a paper with a “foreign component,” defined as “performance of any significant scientific element” of the research outside of the U.S. But now, NIH managers appear to have changed the definition of foreign component to include any co-authorship with a scientist affiliated with a foreign institution, even if all work for the project occurred in the U.S., says Kristin West, director of research ethics and compliance at COGR, a nonprofit that represents research universities on regulatory matters...

Full story at https://www.science.org/content/article/u-s-researchers-face-new-restrictions-publishing-foreign-collaborators.

Lawsuit

From the Daily Cal: The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the UC system [Tuesday] alleging an antisemitic and “hostile educational environment.” The lawsuit alleges that pro-Palestinian protests beginning after Oct. 7, 2023, caused systemic discrimination and violence against Jewish and Israeli students at UCLA and that UCLA neglected those concerns. Additionally, the suit alleges that UCLA faculty is systematically biased against Israelis. It claims that many faculty supported the encampment, used discriminatory hiring practices in the Undergraduate Students Association Council’s Cultural Affairs Commission against “Zionist” students and “failed to consider the depth of UCLA students’ racism against Jews and Israelis.”

This suit comes following the DOJ’s investigation into UCLA’s compliance with Title VI, which prohibits federally assisted organizations such as universities from discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin. The lawsuit argues that Jewish and Israeli students at UCLA were subjected to harassment and a hostile environment created by the pro-Palestine encampment, impeding their access to educational opportunities and resources...

Full story at https://www.dailycal.org/news/uc/doj-sues-uc-over-alleged-antisemitism-at-ucla-for-2nd-time-this-year/article_9c1c573d-f839-4d30-9769-21e3191b15a6.html.

Text of lawsuit: https://dn721605.ca.archive.org/0/items/2-final-hjaa-report.-the-soil-beneath-the-encampments/UCLA_us_v_regents_of_university_of_california%205-26-2026.pdf.

===

It might be noted that - as this blog reported yesterday - the Regents committee dealing with the conflict with the feds met Tuesday, i.e., the day the lawsuit was filed. Possibly, the Regents had some advance notice of the filing. But since the meeting was closed-door, we will never know.