A recurring look at the most compelling developments in standardized testing and U.S. admissions, with practical takeaways for counselors.
So much for those slow summer days; this season brought more movement than usual. Testing requirements kept tightening at the top, international application numbers turned in the wrong direction, and universities began writing AI policies with some real teeth.
Test-optional is becoming less optional
Roughly 90 percent of U.S. colleges and universities remain test-optional, but the momentum has clearly shifted. All eight Ivy League schools either currently require or will soon require SAT or ACT scores, as do many other highly selective institutions: MIT, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins among them. Vanderbilt became the latest to join, announcing in July that it will reinstate a testing requirement for students applying in the fall 2029 cycle after concluding that scores help identify students best positioned to thrive there.
What’s happening at schools that haven’t changed their official policy is more revealing. Summit Prep analyzed the updated Common Data Set for the 2025-26 cycle and found that, of the 75 top-100 colleges reporting, 51 percent became less test-optional than the year before, either switching to test-required or enrolling a higher percentage of students who submitted scores. Among the top 25 on the Forbes list, Duke was the only institution where that number went down.
Also worth noting: for the first time this decade, more first-year applicants reported SAT/ACT scores (743,983) than did not (685,764).
Takeaways for counselors: “Optional” is doing less work than it used to. For students targeting selective institutions, the practical default has become submit unless there’s a reason not to. It’s also worth reminding families that strong scores remain one of the largest sources of merit aid, even at schools where scores play no role in the admissions decision.
International applications to the U.S. are down — and projected to fall further
New Common App data released in August showed a 10 percent decline (roughly 16,000 students) in international applications across its 1,146 member institutions for the 2025-26 cycle, a notable turnaround from a decade of growth. The largest downturns came from Africa (17 percent fewer) and Asia (11 percent fewer). Domestic applications, by contrast, rose about 2 percent.
Looking ahead, projections from NAFSA and JB International forecast roughly 112,000 fewer international students enrolled at U.S. institutions in 2026-27 — as much as $3.4 billion in lost revenue and more than 40,000 American jobs. Of 585 institutions surveyed, 63 percent expect a decline in international enrollment; only 11 percent predict an increase. Department of Homeland Security data for 2025-26 already points to a 13 percent decrease in international enrollment.
Much of this traces back to U.S. federal policy over the last two years, which has raised real questions for families about visa security and predictability. NAFSA has pushed for increased visa interview availability, an expedited process, travel-ban exemptions for visa-seeking students and J-exchange visitors, and preservation of optional practical training for F-1 students. NAFSA CEO Fanta Aw has warned that the U.S. risks forfeiting its position as “the top destination for global talent.”
Takeaways for counselors: Two practical consequences. First, students applying to the U.S. this cycle may face a marginally less crowded international pool at some institutions, but the volatility cuts both ways, and visa timelines deserve to be built into your calendar earlier than usual. Second, families are increasingly building lists that hedge across the U.S., U.K., Canada, and the EU. Testing strategy should be built with that in mind from the start, since the SAT and ACT still travel further than most credentials.
AI is reshaping both applications and Cclassrooms
On the application side, supplemental essays are disappearing. Tulane removed its “why Tulane” essay, Washington University in St. Louis dropped an optional essay, the University of Georgia eliminated its book question, and Cornell removed its university-wide essay (school- and college-specific supplements remain where required). Tulane spokesperson Michael Strecker said concerns about AI-generated work were definitely a factor. The personal statement remains central at most U.S. programs, but the institution-specific supplement is thinning out.
On the classroom side, the University of Chicago unveiled a sweeping AI policy in August that, beginning this fall, prohibits students from using AI in all of the College’s core social science courses. The policy also requires in-person attendance, bars recording of lectures, and designates classrooms device-free (laptops, phones, and wearable AI included). UChicago’s Law School has adopted a parallel approach for first-year courses, with in-class, internet-free exams. Professors retain some latitude for “thoughtful experimentation” with AI, pending divisional approval.
Takeaways for counselors: Fewer supplements means less writing volume but higher stakes on the personal statement and on the parts of the file that can’t be generated: coursework rigor, recommendations, and test scores. And students should know that the campuses they’re applying to are actively rewriting the rules on device and AI use; the habits they build in Grade 12 may not transfer.
Georgetown drops the full testing-history requirement
Georgetown has amended its testing policy in a way that removes a real barrier for students. It still requires an SAT or ACT score, but applicants may now submit without including their full historical testing record. The official language states that Georgetown does not accept superscores; in practice, students can submit more than one score, and Georgetown will consider the highest section scores across those tests through an internal process. The policy also “highly recommends” the ACT science section, particularly for applicants intending to major in the sciences. The ACT writing portion is not considered.
This follows Georgetown’s earlier move to join the Common App, giving students the option of applying through either the Common App or Georgetown’s internal system, with no stated preference between them.
Takeaways for counselors: Students previously discouraged from applying to Georgetown by one uncharacteristic score (or discouraged from testing more than once) no longer have that concern. Expect a larger applicant pool next cycle, and flag the ACT science recommendation early for prospective science majors.
The College Board expands the Educator Question Bank
The College Board released a substantial update to its Educator Question Bank, the free digital storehouse of official practice questions now holding more than 3,500 SAT items. The update adds 270 new questions (150 Reading and Writing, 120 Math) with more than half designated Level Three, the hardest tier. The College Board also adjusted the difficulty rating of 177 existing questions, with roughly a quarter of those moving from Level Three down to Level Two.
The additions fill real gaps. Standard English conventions gained 38 new questions, including more complex verb items that hinge on identifying independent clauses — a question type that had shown up on recent practice and official tests but wasn’t yet represented in the bank. On the math side, there are more circle questions solvable by completing the square, surface-area questions involving 3-D shapes beyond cubes and rectangular prisms, and statistics questions requiring a deeper understanding of margin of error.
Takeaways for counselors: This is the most useful free resource available to students preparing independently, and it was last updated in October 2025, so anyone who pulled practice sets before August is working from an incomplete bank. Worth pointing students and prep providers toward it directly.
About the author
Sean Quinn is the Founder & CEO of Onsen Education, a boutique test preparation and academic tutoring company working with students and schools worldwide. Questions about any of the above, or about how a development affects a specific student? We’re always glad to hear from counselors: sean@onseneducation.com
