This question is a little bit unclear. Assuming that you are speaking of college or graduate school entrance exams, which, in the United States, are tests such as the SAT or GRE, the heavy emphasis on reasoning is meant to sort out those who are or who are not capable of learning and application, which cannot be accomplished without the ability to reason. If such an ability is not present after 12 or 13 years of education, formal or informal, can a student learn anything? Testing in a content area only tells us what a student has learned in a content area, but it does not tell us all that much about the student's ability to learn more, particularly at an undergraduate level, when there are so many possible content areas the student will be exposed to. At a graduate level, testing is sometimes more narrowed, so we can assess scientific foundations for medical school, for example. But generally, no matter what the level of the entrance exam, we need a certain competence in reasoning to assure that the student will be able to learn anything at all. In a business program, undergraduate or graduate, can a student who cannot reason absorb or apply principles of management, economics, or mathematics, all of which are necessary to obtain a degree and subsequent success?