Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 959 posts

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#521

Post by jhayward »

darawk wrote: post #510
kaitai wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you spell out how it devalues the efforts of parents to improve their children's education?

Sure. The adversity score looks at things like the crime rate of the neighborhood you grew up in. That neighborhood is (primarily) a function of two things: Your parents income level, and their ability to prioritize what income they do have to make sure you're in a good neighborhood. The second thing is what's being de-valued. Some parents work really hard and pinch every penny to devote resources to their kid's educ…

> Your parents income level, and their ability to prioritize what income they do have to make sure you're in a good neighborhood. The second thing is what's being de-valued.

So, you're saying that people who have the misfortune to have parents who can't do those things for them should suffer a handicap, right? How well you are able to compete for a slot in college should depend on who your parents are?

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#522

Post by aabajian »

I'll play devil's advocate. I went to a public high school that served a large area (it's Rim of the World High in Southern California in case anyone is curious). It's the only high school in the mountains, and services "poorer" areas like Crestline and "wealthier" areas like Lake Arrowhead. To my knowledge, I was one of the only honors kids from Crestline. My morning consisted of getting up at 5:30 am and taking a 45 minute yellow bus ride to get to school (and school started at 7 am!) and back. How do I explain to colleges that every day of my high school was 1.5 hours longer because of that bus ride?

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#523

Post by manfredo »

spamizbad wrote: post #511
manfredo wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps, but there is also a cultural trend of alt-right/far right groups clamoring about free speech in response to de-platforming and being disinvited to speak at college campuses. For public universities, this is a breach of the first amendment no matter how heinous the speakers' viewpoints are. And for private universities it's a big blow to the institution's reputations for all but the most objectionable speak…

> And for private universities it's a big blow to the institution's reputations for all but the most objectionable speakers. Numerous private universities (Christian schools in particular) enforce strict student code of conduct rules that severely limit the student body's freedom of expression as to way to enforce religious or secular compliance. And it doesn't hurt their reputation but instead is an integral compone…

> Numerous private universities (Christian schools in particular) enforce strict student code of conduct rules that severely limit the student body's freedom of expression as to way to enforce religious or secular compliance. And it doesn't hurt their reputation but instead is an integral component of the school's identity.

Perhaps you're coming from a different cultural context than, but in my circles such universities absolutely are mocked and looked down upon. Some people don't even consider applicants from BYU, and other heavily religious universities because they don't want to reward such institutions.

> I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I'd argue that colleges and universities should have the right to police speech and expression: they should just be upfront about it. "Our house: our rules" as they say.

For public universities, the First Amendment legally obligates them otherwise. For private universities they already have the right to police speech and expression. It is, as you say, their house and their rules. They don't police (or rather they are very liberal in their policing) because freedom of speech and expression are central to an effective academy. Once universities start policing heavy-handedly, or on ideological grounds people start to doubt whether the ideas voiced are genuine or whether people are censoring themselves out of fear of retaliation from the institution. This cloud of doubt hangs overall the research published by that university, and the reputation of that university suffers considerably.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#524

Post by [deleted] »

fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #165
rhegart wrote: post #131

Equality of opportunity over outcome for me. Now Asians will be discriminated against secretly. My family sacrificing vacations and eating out for 12 years (literally ate out 5x max) to afford to live in a good school district shouldn’t penalize us. My dad commuted 4 hours daily instead of moving...I’m getting pushed further and further to the right.

>I’m getting pushed further and further to the right. Maybe not, it feels like to me that the Overton window[0] has been sliding left. My views on freedom of speech made me a 'leftist commie' when I used them to defend South Park and Eminem now most often I'm accused being 'alt-right' by those who disagree with those same views. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

[deleted]

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#525

Post by [deleted] »

batbomb wrote: post #376
darawk wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and his point is why should his dad make that sacrifice for his kids if the SAT board is just going to subvert his efforts?

What would it subvert? You go to a better school, you get a better education, you are more educated and you get a 34 on the ACT. If you go to a crappy school and you get the same score than there's no qualitative difference between the schools and your parents skipped vacations for nothing. But obviously the OP must believe there was value in the better school otherwise they wouldn't mention it. So they would believe…

[deleted]

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#526

Post by kaitai »

Glyptodon wrote: post #18

This seems likely to end up being ugly. For example wealthy people could buy or rent addresses in "adverse" neighborhoods, or charter schools might locate offices there, in order to attempt to improve scores on this metric. At the same time this won't be able to identify many adverse life circumstances like abusive parents, cancer, etc. What it does do is outsource components of admissions decisions the colleges may…

It always gets ugly. I had a (well-off, white) friend use another friend's address to get into the high school I went to. He ended up at Princeton so I guess it worked well for him. No one did anything about it. The case in 2011 where an Ohio woman (Kelley Williams-Bolar) was sentenced to a short jail sentence and 3 years probation and asked to pay $30000 to the school because she did the same thing has come up in the news again. She's black of course. There's that guy who paid $400,000 to get his kid into Georgetown as a tennis player who is now suing Georgetown 'cause they had the gall to expel his kid. It's all a matter of how much you can pay for a lawyer after your crime/gaming of the system.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#527

Post by svd4anything »

rhegart wrote: post #131

Equality of opportunity over outcome for me. Now Asians will be discriminated against secretly. My family sacrificing vacations and eating out for 12 years (literally ate out 5x max) to afford to live in a good school district shouldn’t penalize us. My dad commuted 4 hours daily instead of moving...I’m getting pushed further and further to the right.

The more I reflect on your comment the more obvious to me it is that the situation is ultra urgent.

Somebody needs to get a class action going asap, tomorrow.

Its so so true that so many Asian families have made massive financial and personal sacrifices in the hope to provide their children the best opportunities possible. This is clearly protected activity under the founding documents of our nation, pursuing life, liberty and happiness for themselves and their children through education.

I can’t imagine the sinking feeling running through so many of those incredibly honest and hardworking families tonight. Imagine you saved everything, lived in the smallest apartment possible barely in the good school zone, spent extra money on tutors and extra circulars and your high school senior or junior learns all his or her effort all the family’s effort they want to cancel out.

It’s a blatant attempt to punish Asian families for believing in America.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#529

Post by cljs-js-eval »

learc83 wrote: post #228
danmaz74 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, if you make a sacrifice to earn something, that something isn't a privilege.

Your parents making a sacrifice isn't the same thing as you making a sacrifice. If my dad makes a sacrifice by working 100 hours a week to buy me a Maserati, the car is definitely a privilege not something I earned. And yeah, I may have lost out on spending time with my dad, but that wasn't a choice I made, so while it cost me something it wasn't a sacrifice on my part.

Sometimes it's hard to see the second order effects of our actions, but it seems pretty clear cut how society will be affected if you punish people willing to invest in their childrens' education.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#530

Post by fiblye »

spamizbad wrote: post #511
manfredo wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps, but there is also a cultural trend of alt-right/far right groups clamoring about free speech in response to de-platforming and being disinvited to speak at college campuses. For public universities, this is a breach of the first amendment no matter how heinous the speakers' viewpoints are. And for private universities it's a big blow to the institution's reputations for all but the most objectionable speak…

> And for private universities it's a big blow to the institution's reputations for all but the most objectionable speakers. Numerous private universities (Christian schools in particular) enforce strict student code of conduct rules that severely limit the student body's freedom of expression as to way to enforce religious or secular compliance. And it doesn't hurt their reputation but instead is an integral compone…

Let me preface by saying I disagree with everything you say, but I still think you have the right to say it.

Universities are meant to be institutions of learning. Learning isn’t always comfortable. Some long held truths turn out to be wrong at some point. What we all think is true or right right now could completely reverse in a decade. Letting people speak especially when it’s against your morals is important for learning and understanding. Even if it’s bizarre and incoherent, if somebody believes it, we should try to understand why so that we can better educate those who were persuaded.

As an example of the rapid change in public thought and what’s acceptable, almost nobody publicly supported gay marriage a little over a decade ago. Saying you did would result in mockery, people questioning your sexual identity, people bringing up the religious history of America, etc. Now publicly opposing it is career suicide.

Post reply on HN