MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions • Hacker News Board

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#21

Post by UncleMeat » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

realtalk_sp wrote: post #18

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

While it's true that prep courses can help dramatically, the SAT subject tests are also not really that hard. I don't consider myself terribly smart (certainly not MIT level) and I managed to get an 800 on the Math II and 800 on Chemistry with a minimum of studying using pretty inexpensive books. This applied to many of my friends as well.

This is one of the reasons the subject tests are not especially useful. And since they test knowledge rather than aptitude, making them more difficult doesn't actually find smarter people but instead people who had access to more rigorous high school coursework.

At the GRE level this is even more extreme. For competitive programs a perfect score doesn't distinguish you so taking the test can only harm you. When applying to grad school I was explicitly advised not to take the GRE subject tests.

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#22

Post by thaumasiotes » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #15

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

SAT prep courses advertise that they can increase scores by 100 points but generally they're lying in order to sell more test courses. But the real number is closer to "11 to 15 points on the math section and 6 to 9 points on the verbal."[1] [1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228337033_Using_Lin...

Note also that the measurement error of a section score is 30 points, which dwarfs the effect of prep.

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#23

Post by metalforever » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

krastanov wrote: post #6

codingslave wrote: post #5

Most of this is to obscure their admission criteria. Harvard has come under fire for actively discriminating against Asian applicants. By removing a standard test, these colleges can actively discriminate whilst making it more difficult to prove admissions bias from a numerical and arguably more objective standard.

They are removing the extra optional tests, not the main SAT test. Sounds great to me, as these extra tests just show you have the money to take them. Your comment is an unfounded opinion, please do not present it with the certainty of a fact.

Low income students get a fee waiver

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#24

Post by asdfman123 » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:15 PM UTC

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

I've worked as an SAT prep tutor and I've worked in the oil industry.

Actually, I felt way more guilt about my SAT tutoring work than the oil industry. The world runs on oil, but no one needs expensive SAT tutoring to give rich kids an edge over the poor ones.

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#25

Post by asdfman123 » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:17 PM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #15

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

SAT prep courses advertise that they can increase scores by 100 points but generally they're lying in order to sell more test courses. But the real number is closer to "11 to 15 points on the math section and 6 to 9 points on the verbal."[1] [1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228337033_Using_Lin...

As a former SAT tutor (and a guy who gamed the hell out of the SAT) I have trouble believing that. There are only a few classes of questions they ask on the test, and if you master them the whole test is a walk in the park.

Maybe the problem is most students just don't give a damn about the classes their parents make them take? Can someone explain the findings in this paper?

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#26

Post by hnburnsy » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:18 PM UTC

Does MIT ask for AMC/AIME scores which are miles above the SAT Math Subject tests?

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#27

Post by Spivak » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:19 PM UTC

asdfman123 wrote: post #24

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

I've worked as an SAT prep tutor and I've worked in the oil industry. Actually, I felt way more guilt about my SAT tutoring work than the oil industry. The world runs on oil, but no one needs expensive SAT tutoring to give rich kids an edge over the poor ones.

This seems like such a weird stance since pretty much all formal education isn't free. Even without SAT prep rich families can still afford better schools, private tutors, set up apprenticeships.

It's a weird world where people are mad that those with means are using them to educate themselves and their children.

As an adult I choose to pay for lots of different forms of education that gives me "advantage" -- bleh -- over my friends, peers, coworkers, etc.. Why should I feel guilty that I have the means to buy culinary textbooks so I can bake better?

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#28

Post by DiogenesKynikos » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

codingslave wrote: post #5

Most of this is to obscure their admission criteria. Harvard has come under fire for actively discriminating against Asian applicants. By removing a standard test, these colleges can actively discriminate whilst making it more difficult to prove admissions bias from a numerical and arguably more objective standard.

There's been a similar debate over subject GREs in my field. The argument has been made that subject GREs are racist/sexist, because of the differing distributions of test scores in different demographic groups. There is a strong social pressure to accept this argument, despite its obvious absurdity, leading most people in the field to do so (and if they disagreed, they probably wouldn't tell you).

The problem is that graduate school admissions committees are left with very few quantitative measures. Undergrad grades are difficult to compare, because every university grades differently, and applicants come from different countries with completely different grading scales. So many people score perfectly on the quantitative GRE that it's nearly useless. The verbal GRE seems irrelevant to a scientific field, and it seems pointless to rule out international applicants because they don't know the meaning of the word "garrulous." In short, the subject GRE was one of the only uniform quantitative measures available to admissions committees, and now it's considered "racist."

There upshot, ironically, is that the elimination of quantitative measures makes discrimination easier to hide. This discrimination is meant to be positive, helping increase representation of underrepresented groups. The applicants who suffer most from this policy are those who are just on the line between admission and rejection, and who don't come from the "correct" demographic. The people pushing these policies think they're changing the world for the better, but it sure looks unfair to the individuals they're denying entry to. Applicants are being treated as representatives of their race or gender, rather than as individuals who should be considered individually.

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#29

Post by neaden » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

The question shouldn't be is the SAT unfairly biased towards families with money, since of course it is, but is the SAT less biased towards families with money then other criteria. Having parents with money and connections lets you get tutoring to increase your GPA, tutoring to write essays, connections to get internships, the free time to do clubs, training to excel in sports, and so many other things.

Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

#30

Post by hackinthebochs » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

yardie wrote: post #8

I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…

I'm an underrepresented minority and I increased my SAT score by 200-300 from the PSAT to SAT, depending on how you want to measure the change. This was just by doing self-study with off the shelf test prep material. The classes aren't what increases your score, its the consistent structured study and ones innate potential. For some people, no amount of study is going to get them into the 90+th percentile. While others who have the capacity to do well but haven't had the best instruction over the years can cover a lot of ground with the right prep. But this is exactly what SAT is intended to measure, scholastic potential. That some people can increase scores dramatically through preparation does not indicate a failure of the test, but rather its success.