Camille Faivre is a distinguished education expert whose work has become increasingly vital in the shifting landscapes of post-pandemic learning. With a specialized focus on education management, she has dedicated her career to helping institutions navigate the complexities of digital transformation and the implementation of robust e-learning programs. As a consultant for various state boards and private institutions, she brings a nuanced perspective to the debate over standardized testing, balancing the need for academic rigor with the practical realities of student accessibility. Her insights are particularly timely as states like Florida move away from traditional benchmarks, opting for alternative assessments that challenge the long-standing dominance of the SAT and ACT.
This conversation explores the controversial rise of the Classic Learning Test (CLT) and its rapid adoption across several American states. We examine the tension between increasing graduation rates and maintaining academic standards, particularly in the realm of mathematics where the CLT has been criticized for its reliance on middle-school-level concepts. The discussion also delves into the ideological motivations behind the test—its focus on the “Western canon”—and the financial implications for state budgets. Finally, we look at the predictive validity of the exam for college success and whether this new “gold standard” is truly preparing the next generation for the rigors of higher education and the modern workforce.
Florida has seen a notable surge in high school graduation rates since the introduction of the Classic Learning Test as a recognized alternative; what does this shift tell us about the current state of academic requirements in the region?
The data coming out of Florida is quite striking, particularly when you look at the immediate impact on graduation statistics. In Duval County Public Schools, for instance, the superintendent Christopher Bernier reported a substantial 7 percentage point increase in the graduation rate, climbing from 87% in the 2022-23 school year to over 94% by 2024-25. This tells us that the CLT is serving as a critical safety net for students who were previously unable to “manufacture” the necessary scores on the SAT or ACT, or pass the state’s traditional reading and algebra exams. There is a palpable sense of relief among administrators who want to see their students succeed, with some board members in districts like Hillsborough admitting they support the test specifically because it breaks down barriers to getting a diploma. However, this creates a complex emotional landscape where we are celebrating the act of “crossing the stage” while simultaneously harboring deep-seated anxieties about whether that diploma carries the same weight it once did. When roughly 2,500 students in a single district like Hillsborough—about 1 in 6 graduates—are satisfying their math requirements through this alternative, we have to ask if we are prioritizing the metric of graduation over the mastery of the material.
Critics and mathematics experts have raised concerns that the CLT’s math section aligns more closely with middle-school standards than college readiness; how do the specific components of the test support or refute these claims?
When you dive into the actual mechanics of the CLT’s math section, the differences from traditional exams like the SAT or ACT are undeniable and, for many educators, deeply concerning. An analysis by mathematics professors found that the CLT has a significantly higher concentration of what they describe as pre-algebra or middle-school-level math, with about 25% of the questions falling into this category compared to only 4% on the SAT. We are seeing questions that focus on basic logic, pattern recognition, and ratios—concepts like the “wedding reception” word problem that requires only simple addition and division to solve. Furthermore, the CLT math section includes 14 geometry questions and provides students with a list of formulas and shape explanations, whereas the ACT provides no formulas at all. There is also the “formula” that some students have discovered to beat the test, where they answer the easiest pre-algebra questions and then pick the same letter for every remaining answer, which former math department heads say results in a passing score nine times out of ten. This creates a sensory image of a testing hall where students are not struggling with complex calculus or statistics—which make up a much larger portion of the ACT—but are instead navigating number theory and basic intuition.
While the test is being used extensively for high school graduation, it was originally framed as a premier college entrance exam; what is the reality of its adoption among elite higher education institutions?
The gap between the marketing of the CLT as a “gold standard” and its actual utility in the college admissions process is one of the most glaring aspects of this transition. While the Pentagon and certain state university systems have added it to their accepted lists, the numbers show that very few students are actually using it to gain entry into top-tier schools. In fact, fewer than 1 percent of students applying to the University of Florida or Florida State University for the 2024 and 2025 fall semesters submitted a CLT score. This lack of traction at selective public institutions is mirrored in the private sector, where only about 350 colleges—many of them private, Christian institutions—accept the CLT, compared to the near-universal acceptance of the SAT and ACT. Educational consultants are expressing a sense of “operating from a point of dishonesty” when suggesting the test to families, because there is simply no evidence yet that it helps a student get into a competitive school. For a student like Uzma Shaikh at the University of Central Florida, the test was a helpful bridge for her merit-based scholarship, but for the vast majority of families, the risk of taking a test that isn’t recognized by the Ivy League or other prestigious national universities is too high to ignore.
The Classic Learning Test has been described as a “darling of the political right” due to its focus on the Western canon; how does this ideological underpinning influence the way the test is designed and perceived?
The CLT is unapologetically rooted in what its CEO, Jeremy Tate, calls the “Christian intellectual tradition,” featuring texts from thinkers like Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and Martin Luther. This focus on the “Western canon” was a direct response to a perceived lack of interest in classic literature and philosophy in traditional public school curricula. By designing a test around these foundational texts, the creators hope to influence what is actually taught in the classroom, essentially using the exam as a lever to pivot education back toward more traditional, often conservative, academic ideals. This has made the test a focal point in “red states” where legislatures are increasingly skeptical of modern educational trends like diversity, equity, and inclusion. We are seeing a pattern where states like Indiana, Georgia, and North Carolina are leading the charge in adopting the CLT, often driven by lawmakers who want public universities to align with these traditional values. However, this has also invited criticism from both sides of the aisle, with some decrying the focus on “old White men” and others complaining that the inclusion of authors like Toni Morrison still veers into “woke” territory, creating a constant political friction that surrounds every testing cycle.
The financial investment in the CLT is significant, with millions of dollars being committed by state governments; what are the broader economic and systemic implications of this rapid expansion?
The rapid adoption of the CLT is not just a shift in pedagogy; it is a massive financial undertaking that is proving very lucrative for the company administering the test. In Florida alone, the Department of Education and various school districts have signed contracts worth at least $2.8 million since 2023, and that is likely a conservative estimate given the number of districts yet to report. Arkansas has taken it even further, budgeting a staggering $12 million over the next four years to administer the exam in its high schools. This influx of taxpayer money into a relatively new and less-vetted testing platform raises serious questions about fiscal responsibility, especially when state boards like those in Iowa initially rejected the test due to a lack of research. When you consider that Texas is moving toward adoption despite reports noting the exam has the “least predictive ability” compared to its competitors, the systemic risk becomes clear. We are seeing a redistribution of educational funding toward a platform that, while increasing graduation numbers, has yet to prove it can provide a reliable return on investment in terms of long-term student success and workforce readiness.
Given the lack of long-term data on student outcomes, how are universities and state officials addressing the potential gap in college readiness for those who graduate using the CLT?
There is a palpable sense of “wait and see” among university officials, which is a cold comfort for the students currently in the system. Marnie Villanueva Marrero of the State University System of Florida noted that it is simply too early to evaluate student outcomes because the first major cohort of CLT users is only in its third year of higher education. This lack of data didn’t stop boards from adopting the test, often over the lone dissenting voices of faculty representatives like Amanda Phalin, who warned that there was no research to suggest the CLT could predict student success. The Florida Department of Education has acknowledged the perceived ease of the test by slightly raising the passing score from an 11 to a 14 out of 40, attempting to bring the “bar” closer to the rigor of the SAT’s 420 or the ACT’s 16. Yet, members of the Hillsborough County School Board, like Nadia Combs, remain deeply concerned that students are entering the workforce or college with a false sense of security, only to find they cannot perform on a typical test or meet the demands of a high-level job. The fear is that we are creating a “diploma mill” effect where the credential no longer guarantees the underlying skill set, leaving students vulnerable in a competitive global economy.
What is your forecast for the Classic Learning Test?
I forecast that the Classic Learning Test will continue to expand rapidly within conservative-led states as a tool for both political signaling and immediate relief for lagging graduation statistics, but it will face a significant “day of reckoning” within the next five years. As the first large cohorts of CLT-admitted students move through their junior and senior years of college, universities will finally have the hard data they need to compare GPA retention and graduation rates against those who took the SAT or ACT. If that data reveals a significant gap in performance, we will likely see a sharp reversal in adoption or a mandatory overhaul of the CLT’s math and science rigor to remain competitive. However, in the short term, the financial momentum is too great to ignore; with states like Arkansas committing $12 million and Texas moving toward statewide use, the CLT is set to become a permanent, if controversial, fixture in the American “assessment wars,” further balkanizing the educational landscape along ideological lines. Ultimately, the test’s survival will depend on whether it can move beyond being a “graduation alternative” and prove it can truly prepare a student for the complexities of a 21st-century career.
