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

#81

Post by NeverFade » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

systemvoltage wrote: post #71

knzhou wrote: post #57

Anybody cheering the exclusion of some test or other, because it was a pain to study for in high school, is simply not noticing the frog-boiling secondary effects going on. Every bit of emphasis taken out of objective results mean more advantage for smooth talking, photogenic, well-connected people. Yes, some misguided parents waste thousands of dollars on SAT courses. But students can also prep using the $20 officia…

College Prep is a giant business that needs to be dismantled. They have a monopoly in this area. IMO each college should be doing their own objective test. Definitely agree about subjective tests - smooth talkers will get ahead. But that's already the case in getting a job after they graduate - interviewing process is already broken.

And how exactly will you "dismantle it"?

People want to pay thousands of dollars to try to gain access to elite institutions. No matter what test you'll come up with, someone will offer an expensive prep course for it, because they will have willing customers.

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

#82

Post by applecrazy » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #21

realtalk_sp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 apply…

The subject tests, IMO, are terrible. I took the Chemistry one right after taking AP (college level) Chemistry, and while I got a full score on that, I got absolutely destroyed on the subject test. They asked trivia-like questions and barely tested for actual chemistry knowledge.

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

#83

Post by nilkn » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

knzhou wrote: post #57

Anybody cheering the exclusion of some test or other, because it was a pain to study for in high school, is simply not noticing the frog-boiling secondary effects going on. Every bit of emphasis taken out of objective results mean more advantage for smooth talking, photogenic, well-connected people. Yes, some misguided parents waste thousands of dollars on SAT courses. But students can also prep using the $20 officia…

I think it's important to clarify that that SAT is not the same as the SAT Subject Tests. The latter are being excluded, but not the former. One could reasonably argue at this point that the Subject Tests are simply redundant with AP tests.

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

#84

Post by systemvoltage » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

NeverFade wrote: post #81

systemvoltage wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

College Prep is a giant business that needs to be dismantled. They have a monopoly in this area. IMO each college should be doing their own objective test. Definitely agree about subjective tests - smooth talkers will get ahead. But that's already the case in getting a job after they graduate - interviewing process is already broken.

And how exactly will you "dismantle it"? People want to pay thousands of dollars to try to gain access to elite institutions. No matter what test you'll come up with, someone will offer an expensive prep course for it, because they will have willing customers.

It needs to be dismantled due to monopoly. I’m not sure how. Those are orthogonal.

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

#85

Post by thaumasiotes » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

posterboy wrote: post #46

thaumasiotes wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The conventional wisdom has long been that the SAT subject tests are MORE predictive of future success at MIT, because the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests. Who cares what the conventional wisdom says? The psychometric results are that SAT I scores and SAT II scores predict performance about equally well in isolation and don't have more predictive value in combin…

There is another implication as a consequence of the statement "the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests." That is, I first read thag the students don't suffer under these conditions . It is a valuable trait no doubt, to be able to cram swaths of loosely associated facts. I'd argue that it's a vital trade for study, but perhaps it is less severe than only twenty years…

> I think that means SAT scores don't predict success too well at all beyond a certain threshold.

Try reading about it.

https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Webb_RM_2001_Top.pdf

> There is another implication as a consequence of the statement "the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests." That is, I first read tha[t] the students don't suffer under these conditions.

This is not a valid inference to draw; the influence of test prep, cramming, coaches, etc. is also minimal for the main SAT, but students suffer through them anyway.

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

#86

Post by jimmyvalmer » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #28

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 tha…

MIT's grad schools jettisoned GRE consideration a while ago. As you say, the GRE quant is trivial by MIT's standards, and the GRE verbal largely irrelevant.

It's fairly easy to spot the "heavy-hitters" just from recommendations, undergraduate publication record, thesis, and GPA. In short, MIT and its elite cohort (CMU, Caltech, etc.) only accept undergrads who found their way into their professor's research groups -- this feat in and of itself is a superior indicator.

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

#87

Post by applecrazy » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

basementcat wrote: post #50

Makes sense; doesn't everybody pretty much get perfect scores on these? (at least everyone who is a serious applicant to an institution like MIT) If everyone gets the same (perfect) score then the test doesn't really help the admissions committee select for the best applicants. Tests like AMC 12 may be more useful for this type of purpose.

Yep. SAT Math II is all but worthless at this point. The middle 50% for top universities ranges from 800-800 (aka the max score).

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

#88

Post by knzhou » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

systemvoltage wrote: post #71

knzhou wrote: post #57

Anybody cheering the exclusion of some test or other, because it was a pain to study for in high school, is simply not noticing the frog-boiling secondary effects going on. Every bit of emphasis taken out of objective results mean more advantage for smooth talking, photogenic, well-connected people. Yes, some misguided parents waste thousands of dollars on SAT courses. But students can also prep using the $20 officia…

College Prep is a giant business that needs to be dismantled. They have a monopoly in this area. IMO each college should be doing their own objective test. Definitely agree about subjective tests - smooth talkers will get ahead. But that's already the case in getting a job after they graduate - interviewing process is already broken.

Standardized testing is a natural monopoly -- if you have every college making their own, it's a crazy duplication of work, will produce a lot of substandard tests, and will put tons of strain on the students. Might as well ask everybody to lay their own fiber.

ETS isn't perfect (I think the amount they charge for GRE-related stuff is sickening) but it at least does a good job of making sure the best prep resources possible are cheap or free.

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

#89

Post by systemvoltage » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

psutor wrote: post #78

systemvoltage wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

College Prep is a giant business that needs to be dismantled. They have a monopoly in this area. IMO each college should be doing their own objective test. Definitely agree about subjective tests - smooth talkers will get ahead. But that's already the case in getting a job after they graduate - interviewing process is already broken.

Won't each college having to have their own test lead to many/most colleges, especially smaller ones, finding it easier or more cost effective to purchase their test from a central source, leading to some large College Board-like company making exams and a prep industry for that standard exam?

I think it’s pretty insane that a single company is a gatekeeper to elite institutions.

I’m honestly not sure of the solution, but the problem is pretty evident. College Prep could raise exam fees by 200% tomorrow and you have no law, no oversight from the government or anything preventing them from doing so. Absolute monopoly.

They’re no different than professors in bed with book publishers, mandating a particular book for the course. Students need to spend $350 on a textbook is insanity.

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

#90

Post by Spivak » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 6:08 PM UTC

hoka-one-one wrote: post #61

Spivak wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, faking a disability is deplorable but this stance is bonkers. I wish my parents had the money when I was growing up to get me checked and diagnose my ADHD. And of course you wouldn't want to report to the college if a person has a disability, are you trying to scarlet letter everyone who needs a little more time to read from dyslexia?

As someone who has used similar accommodations (though not specifically on the SAT), yes. Dyslexia will hold you back in college. SAT is intended to measure odds of success in college.

You're not wrong but I think that's due to how much of university is based around timed tests. The artificial difficulty is maddening. I was fortunate that my school's disability office had fangs and that the maths program wasn't super competitive and wanted students to learn more than get marks.

My favorite professor was teaching number theory and always scheduled his classes for the end day and gave unlimited time for exams. Every time I would sit there for at least 5 hours (which wasn't super uncommon) and it was the nicest thing to not be freaking out and trying to force myself to focus.