Camille Faivre is a distinguished expert in education management and a leading voice in the evolution of institutional frameworks within the post-pandemic landscape. With a specialized focus on the development and implementation of open and e-learning programs, she has been at the forefront of helping universities adapt to a digital-first world while maintaining academic rigor. As the testing industry undergoes its most significant transformation in decades, Camille’s insights provide a necessary bridge between administrative strategy and student outcomes. This conversation explores the massive implications of the ETS acquisition of ACT, a merger that centralizes the assessment data of 35 million people annually. We delve into the complexities of bias in standardized testing, the resurgence of entrance requirements at elite institutions like the Ivy League, and how technology is being leveraged to redefine human capital for the modern workforce.
With the consolidation of two major testing entities reaching 35 million people annually, what operational changes and strategic advantages do you anticipate for the global testing landscape?
The acquisition of ACT by the nonprofit ETS represents a seismic shift toward a more centralized and integrated assessment pipeline. By bringing a widely known brand like ACT into its portfolio—alongside the GRE and the TOEFL—ETS is effectively positioning itself as the primary gatekeeper for the entire journey from secondary education to professional life. Operationally, the deal, which was expected to close around July 1, allows ETS to absorb the pieces of ACT that had recently been converted into a for-profit entity by Nexus Capital Management. This hybrid structure is fascinating because while ETS intends to run ACT as a mission-focused organization, they are keeping the for-profit status for now with the potential to scale these products to the “next level.” The strategic advantage here is the sheer scale of the data; managing 35 million test-takers every year provides a massive laboratory for refining educational standards and addressing the sagging confidence currently plaguing many academic institutions.
Standardized tests have long faced criticism for correlating more with family wealth than student potential; how can this new mega-entity address these deep-seated equity concerns?
Addressing the “wealth correlation” critique is perhaps the most urgent mission for this new partnership, especially as organizations like FairTest point out that over 2,000 four-year colleges remain test-optional for the fall of 2026. ETS is leaning heavily on what their leadership calls their “secret sauce,” which is a highly automated and rigorous process for bias-testing questions before they are ever released to the public. They utilize advanced technology and artificial intelligence to measure how different demographic subgroups respond to specific questions, ensuring that no single group is unfairly disadvantaged. This process is overseen by human experts to ensure the AI itself isn’t introducing new biases, a critical step in maintaining the integrity of the National Career Readiness Certificate and other assessments. By centralizing these resources, ETS and ACT hope to move beyond the narrative that tests are merely a metric of parental income and instead prove they are a fair measure of human capital across all socio-economic backgrounds.
Recently, several elite institutions, including all eight Ivy League schools, have returned to requiring standardized tests. What do you believe is driving this reversal after the pandemic-era experiment with test-optional admissions?
The return to standardized requirements is driven by a realization that, in an increasingly complex admissions landscape, these scores provide a necessary, objective benchmark that internal data shows is a strong indicator of future student success. During the pandemic, the pause on testing was a public health necessity, but the long-term absence of these metrics created a vacuum that other admissions criteria struggled to fill. For instance, over 2,100 STEM faculty members across the University of California system recently signed a letter expressing concern that a lack of standardized math benchmarks has led to a noticeable drop in preparation among enrolled students. Furthermore, hundreds of humanities and social science faculty have pointed out that the explosion of generative AI makes personal essays a far less reliable indicator of a student’s actual writing and critical thinking abilities. In this context, a supervised, standardized test like the ACT or SAT becomes one of the few ways to ensure a student’s skills are truly their own.
The acquisition includes the WorkKeys program and the National Career Readiness Certificate; how does this expand the traditional scope of a testing organization into the professional world?
This expansion is a brilliant strategic move that recognizes the growing need for clear pathways from the classroom directly into the workforce. By acquiring WorkKeys, ETS is no longer just a hurdle for college entry; it is becoming a facilitator for career advancement and workplace skill certification. This allows the organization to serve a much broader demographic, including those who may not be pursuing a traditional four-year degree but still need to prove their competencies to potential employers. We are seeing a shift where the “measure of a nation” is no longer just focused on academic degrees but on the tangible investment in human capital that can be applied to the labor market immediately. This integration helps bridge the gap between educational institutions and the professional world, providing a standardized language for skills that both educators and hiring managers can understand.
What is your forecast for the future of standardized testing?
My forecast for the next decade is that standardized testing will undergo a total technological rebirth, moving away from “static” exams toward dynamic, AI-enhanced assessments that can pinpoint a student’s specific learning gaps in real-time. We will likely see a push from the federal level, similar to the recent proposals for a “compact” with colleges that ties research grants to standardized testing requirements, which could force even more institutions to re-adopt these benchmarks. However, the success of this return depends entirely on the industry’s ability to prove that their “secret sauce” of bias-mitigation actually works. If ETS and ACT can use their combined 35-million-person reach to create tests that are more predictive of success than a student’s zip code, they will not only rebuild trust in higher education but also become the essential infrastructure for a global, skills-based economy. Ultimately, the future of testing lies in its ability to be a tool for equity and mobility rather than a barrier to it.
