Ohio State to require applicants' ACT/SAT scores, ending pandemic-era policy
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Ohio State University announced this week it will once again require ACT/SAT scores for first-year applicants, starting in 2026.
Five years ago this week, Ohio State shut down due to COVID-19, and it has not required test scores since. OSU said the pandemic caused disruptions in traditional testing, but now the university said it is time to end its test-optional pilot program.
'Our goal is to find and admit students who will succeed at Ohio State, and test scores provide valuable insight into academic success at our university,' Executive Vice President and Provost Ravi V. Bellamkonda said.
Unsolved Ohio: Where is Carla Losey?
Ohio has 13 traditional public colleges, and Ohio State is the first among them to announce a full return to requiring test scores. The other 12 public universities are all test-optional in various forms, so Ohio State is set to be the only public university requiring test scores for all first-year applicants.
Colleges like Kent State and Ohio University have committed to long-term test optional application requirements, where many others have only announced they will be test-optional through 2025 or 2026. At some universities, test scores are required for certain majors or scholarships, but not for general admission.
The ACT and SAT is used in the application process to provide insight into a student's performance, Ballamkonda said. Some test-optional Ohio universities have additional requirements if a student does not submit test scores. The University of Toledo, for instance, requires a higher minimum GPA for students not submitting test scores, and Wright State requires some form of English literacy proof ranging from SAT scores to a high Duolingo level.
How Trump's spending freeze and tariffs are affecting an Ohio brewery
Ohio State said it will not rely solely on test scores when making admission decisions, folding them into their larger application review process. Scores are also only required to attend Ohio State's main campus in Columbus, as regional campuses have open-access policies for Ohio students and generally do not consider test scores. Transfer students are also not required to send in scores.
'The ACT/SAT score complements other measures to create a fuller picture of future academic success at Ohio State when used as part of a holistic review process,' Vice Provost for Strategic Enrollment Management James Orr said. 'Our analysis shows Ohio State students who submit test scores have higher grade point averages and are more likely to progress through the university.'
According to the College Board, which administers the SAT and AP tests, Ohio State admitted students' test scores typically range between 1290 and 1440 on the SAT and between 27 and 32 on the ACT. A perfect SAT score is 1600, and a perfect ACT score is 36.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
BREAKING: Federal immigration raids hitting Omaha
Customers are perplexed to find a South Omaha store along the main South 24th Street business district closed at mid-morning Tuesday. (Cindy Gonzalez/Nebraska Examiner) OMAHA — Multiple immigration enforcement operations unfolding throughout Omaha on Tuesday have all local elected Latino leaders out visiting various work sites, some South Omaha businesses shutting their doors for the time being and area residents checking in with each other in a frenzy. Latino leaders tracking the situation, posting about it on social media and speaking with workers said they had heard of up to a half-dozen worksites where federal immigration agents had visited. A man trying to get some goods at a South 24th Street store said he worked at Omaha's Nebraska Beef plant, which he said let him and other employees go home at mid-morning. Roger Garcia, chairman of the Douglas County board, announced during a county board meeting Tuesday that he had to leave because his community was 'being terrorized.' 'I have to depart,' he said. 'As we speak, there's word of at least two raids happening at this moment, so I have to go. I have to try and help.' He was among leaders posting in English and Spanish on social media to keep the community informed. Among the potentially targeted businesses Tuesday were Glenn Valley Foods, LALA's and JBS, processing and production plants in the eastern part of the city. Garcia said a company spokesperson told him there was no raid at JBS. State Sens. Dunixi Guereca and Margo Juarez of South Omaha gathered mid-morning with a half dozen other community representatives on South 24th Street. Guereca pointed at the quiet business corridor, the heart of Nebraska's largest Latino business district, and said: 'This is fear.' U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had no immediate comment on the moves. Local law enforcement agencies said they were not participating in the federal raids, but that they are providing agents and the public with traffic enforcement around targeted locations, as needed. Guereca said he was disappointed in the way federal agents carried out the operation, which he said created unnecessary fear for families, customers and merchants. 'Businesses closed their doors. Not only are folks not going to work, they're not consuming,' he said. Yesenia Peck, who heads the Nebraska Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, also came to the 24th Street district to check on businesses. As she approached one store, a customer was attempting to open the door, but it was locked. She said she knew of at least one foreign consulate office based in Omaha, the Guatemalan Consulate, that was sending a representative to an affected worksite. 'Everybody is scared right now. Businesses are closing,' she said. 'This is not life…' Peck said one merchant asked her, 'How are we going to pay the bills? Pay rent?' Martha Barrera, who owns a salon on 24th Street, said her workers have continued to accept customers, but she said people are in panic mode about what is happening outside the doors. She said she is happy that community leaders have offered information on rights and how to respond if federal agents were to come to her business or any others. She and others on the business corridor said their stores rely on Latino families and are worried about future commerce. Peck said she understands there are laws and people must abide by those. 'But this is not the way it should be done,' she said. 'Not cruelly.' 'What is happening right now is unbelievable. I've seen this kind of thing in other countries,' she said, including her homeland of Peru. 'It's just not the right way.' Saul Lopez, of LULAC National, was headed with other community members to pass out information about worker rights at workplaces and said a concern was for parents who might be separated from children. 'We're very worried right now about what's going on with the families.' A leader of an Omaha nonprofit that works with youths said Tuesday that the organization has been working to identify families whose working parent may have been detained and separated from their children. So far, the organization's leader said at least two kids in their care who are from two different families have a parent caught up in the operations. The organization was busy getting a hold of emergency contacts for the kids. Also Tuesday, immigration advocates and community leaders had turned a South Omaha organization into a sort of information headquarters to better understand and coordinate legal, outreach and response activities. This is a developing story. It was last updated at 2:25 p.m. on Tuesday, June 10. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. Purging the CDC Advisory Committee Will Put Lives at Risk
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifying during his Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions confirmation hearing on January 30, 2025 in Washington, DC Credit - Kevin Dietsch—Getty Images When Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. began his tenure as Health and Human Services Secretary, he pledged, 'We won't take away anyone's vaccines.' However, recent policy changes under his leadership—coupled with the unprecedented dismissal of all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 9—have proven that statement false, raising grave concerns for our nation's COVID-19 response and broader vaccine policies. These shifts not only jeopardize public health but also threaten to erode trust in our health institutions at a critical time. In May 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) introduced a new COVID-19 vaccine framework, limiting access to updated vaccines for Americans aged 65 and older or those with specific risk factors. Furthermore, Secretary Kennedy announced that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for 'healthy' children or pregnant women—bypassing the standard ACIP review process. Compounding these changes, the abrupt removal of ACIP's entire panel of independent experts, who have guided evidence-based vaccine policy for decades, risks destabilizing a cornerstone of public health. These actions collectively restrict access to a vital tool for saving lives and undermine confidence in our health systems. Read More: What to Know About RFK Jr. Removing All Experts From CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee During my tenure as Surgeon General under the first Trump administration, we faced significant public health challenges, from addressing the opioid epidemic by increasing access to Naloxone to launching Operation Warp Speed for the COVID-19 vaccine development effort. The vaccines developed under Trump's first term have proven to be one of our most effective defenses against COVID-19; yet, the current administration's new policies limit their availability, potentially leaving millions vulnerable. The dismissal of ACIP's experts—without a clear plan for replacing them with qualified scientists—further jeopardizes trust in the institutions tasked with protecting Americans. The major flaw in the new vaccine framework is its narrow assessment of risk. Although the immediate dangers of COVID-19 have lessened, it remains a leading cause of death and hospitalization, claiming nearly 50,000 lives in the U.S. in 2024—more than breast cancer or car accidents. The fact is, 75% of Americans have risk factors, such as obesity or diabetes, that increase their vulnerability to severe COVID outcomes. However, the burden is now placed on individuals to self-identify as high risk, creating confusion and inconsistency in access. Unlike other countries with centralized systems for identifying at-risk individuals, the U.S. expects patients—many of whom lack easy access to healthcare—to navigate eligibility alone. Risk assessment should also consider individual circumstances beyond underlying health conditions. A 58-year-old bus driver or healthcare worker faces significantly greater exposure than someone working remotely. By limiting vaccines to specific groups based solely on preexisting health status, the policy overlooks these critical contextual differences. Secretary Kennedy's team argues that there is insufficient evidence to support updated COVID-19 vaccines for healthy Americans under 65, but this claim is flatly unfounded. Years of real-world data demonstrate that vaccines save lives and reduce hospitalizations across all age groups. During the 2023 to 2024 fall and winter season, 95% of those hospitalized for COVID had not received an updated vaccine. While the administration cites other countries' more restrictive vaccine policies, such comparisons ignore the unique health landscape in the U.S., which includes higher obesity rates, worse maternal health outcomes, and uneven healthcare access. The policy also neglects the issue of Long COVID, which affects millions with debilitating symptoms lasting months or years. Though older adults are at higher risk for severe acute infections, Long COVID disproportionately impacts adults aged 35 to 49—and children are also affected. Vaccination reduces the risk of developing Long COVID, an essential reason many healthy individuals choose to stay up-to-date with their vaccines. Read More: What's the Risk of Getting Long COVID in 2024? Particularly concerning is the decision to end COVID vaccine recommendations for 'healthy' pregnant women, which contradicts the FDA's own guidance. Pregnant women face heightened risks of severe COVID outcomes, including death, pre-eclampsia, and miscarriage. Vaccination during pregnancy is crucial—not just for maternal health but also for protecting infants under six months, who cannot be vaccinated and rely on maternal antibodies for protection. Decades of research confirm that vaccines, including COVID vaccines, safely transfer antibodies to newborns, lowering their risk of severe illness. The dismissal of ACIP's members amplifies these concerns. ACIP has been a trusted, science-driven body that ensures vaccines are safe and effective, saving countless lives through its transparent recommendations. Its members, rigorously vetted for expertise and conflicts of interest, provide independent guidance critical to public health. Removing them without clear evidence of misconduct risks replacing qualified scientists with less experienced voices. This move fuels vaccine hesitancy and skepticism about public health decisions, particularly when paired with the bypassing of ACIP's review process for the new COVID vaccine policies. These changes create uncertainty about who can access vaccines. Without clear CDC recommendations, insurance companies may impose their own coverage criteria, potentially increasing costs for a vaccine that was previously free for most Americans. Healthcare providers, lacking federal guidance and ACIP's expertise, may struggle to advise patients, leading to a confusing and inequitable system that limits choice—hardly the 'medical freedom' Secretary Kennedy claims to champion. Ultimately, these actions threaten to erode trust in public health. FDA officials argue the new framework enhances transparency, yet bypassing ACIP's review and dismissing its members undermines that aim. Extensive data demonstrate that updated vaccines lower hospitalization and death rates, yet this evidence was sidelined. Such actions breed skepticism, making it harder to unite Americans around shared health goals. The stakes are high, but a better path is possible. Restoring trust requires transparent, evidence-based policymaking that prioritizes access to life-saving tools. I urge Secretary Kennedy and the administration to reconsider this framework, reinstate ACIP's role in vaccine policy, and ensure any new appointees are qualified, independent experts. If concerns about ACIP exist, they should be addressed through reform, not dissolution. Healthcare providers and community leaders must also educate patients about vaccination benefits, particularly for vulnerable groups like pregnant women and those with high exposure. Individuals can take action by staying informed, discussing vaccination with their doctors, and advocating for clear, equitable access to vaccines. By working together—government, providers, and citizens—we can protect lives, reduce the burden of Long COVID, and rebuild confidence in our public health system. We must seize this opportunity to unite around science and ensure a healthier, safer, and prosperous future for all Americans. Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Undocumented migrant framed for threatening Trump is eligible for release
A Mexican man facing deportation after being framed for sending a threatening letter to Donald Trump could be released in the coming days. A Chicago immigration judge ruled on Tuesday that Ramón Morales-Reyes, 54, was not a threat to the public and set his bond at $7,500. 'Today's decision gives us hope that he can be by our side again,' Morales-Reyes's daughter Ana said in a statement via the organization Voces de la Frontera. 'We are so grateful to the judge and to the community for supporting us.' The Department of Homeland Security insists the 54-year-old is still a threat. 'While this criminal illegal alien is no longer under investigation for threats against the President, he is in the country illegally with previous arrests for felony hit and run, criminal damage to property, and disorderly conduct with domestic abuse,' Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. The Independent has contacted Morales-Reyes's lawyer for further comment. Reyes was arrested in May in Wisconsin after initially being thought to be the author of letters containing threats to Donald Trump and immigration agents. 'We are tired of this president messing with us Mexicans – we have done more for this county than you whites – you have been deporting my family and now I think it is time Donald J. Trump get what he has coming to him,' the phony letter read. Homeland Security officials initially celebrated the arrest of Morales-Reyes, who they said was an 'illegal alien who threatened to assassinate President Trump,' while attorneys and family members of the man said the letter couldn't be valid since Morales-Reyes can't speak or write in English. Last week, Wisconsin man Demetric D. Scott admitted to writing the letters under the Mexican man's name, in the hopes of getting him deported to prevent his testimony in a robbery case, according to officials. In an interview with police in May, Scott 'admitted that he wrote everything on the letters' and 'believed the letters were the simplest way to get Morales-Reyes 'off his back,' according to court documents obtained by Wisconsin Public Radio. Scott was allegedly recorded on a call from a Milwaukee County jail detailing the scheme to frame the immigrant to prevent him from testifying about a 2023 robbery in which authorities say Morales-Reyes was the victim. '[I]f he gets picked up by ICE, there won't be a jury trial so they will probably dismiss it that day,' Scott said, per court records. Scott, 52, was charged earlier this month with identity theft, intimidating a witness and two counts of bail jumping over the alleged scheme. The charges add to previous allegations of armed robbery, aggravated battery, second-degree recklessly endangering safety and bail jumping over a 2023 incident in which he allegedly attacked Morales-Reyes with a corkscrew while he was riding a bicycle, leaving him with a lung abrasion. Scott insisted the bicycle had been stolen from him and Morales-Reyes had previously threatened him. DHS said in a statement that Morales-Reyes entered the U.S. unlawfully at least nine times between 1998 and 2005. The 54-year-old immigrant's family says he is in the process of seeking a U visa for survivors and witnesses of violent crime. If Morales-Reyes is unable to post bond, removal proceedings begin on July 10. Homeland Security can appeal the bond decision.
