After a yearslong trend of elite colleges dropping standardized test requirements from their applications, the tide seems to be turning for the SAT. Long derided as unfair, unnecessary, or even sexist and racist, college entrance exams are gaining new defenders who point out that, contrary to common conception, standardized tests help—not hinder—talented yet disadvantaged students.

On Sunday, The New York Times published an extended article by David Leonhardt making this exact case. Leonhardt argues that the trend among elite colleges of ditching mandatory SAT or ACT test requirements for applicants is misguided and that the reasons typically given for removing the requirement—that the tests punish disadvantaged students and don’t meaningfully correlate with college success—are factually incorrect.

“Amid all the subjectivity in the admissions process, the SAT and ACT — even with their flaws — offer meaningful information about an applicant’s readiness to do high-level academic work.” Leonhardt writes. “The tests create a fixed benchmark that can be more reliable than high school grades, teacher recommendations or extracurricular activities.”

While many are put off by the persistent score gaps across racial and economic lines, the idea that ditching the test will help minority students or those from low-income families is short-sighted. Yes, SAT scores correlate with income and race—but so do high school GPAs and essays, the other metrics elite colleges most often rely on in the absence of test scores.