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

#341

Post by codyb » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:36 PM UTC

fallingknife wrote: post #107

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…

But that's entirely the point. The people bitching about how the SAT isn't fair aren't smart poor people who are being beaten out by upper middle class losers, but rather upper middle class losers being beaten out by smart poor people. They tell themselves that the test isn't fair, but a part of them knows that they could never get into the 1500's even with all the prep in the world, so they try to get the admissions…

That’s nuts, I got a 1590 on my second try with a calculator that turned out to be missing batteries, the day after going to a friends house and drinking with my only prep being reading a few paragraphs from some big book.

I had a lackluster performance on the new writing section the first time around or I wouldn’t have spent any time upping the original 1520 or whatever.

The point is to brag a little yes because I really never get to tell that story now that I’m 30.

The point is that rewarding me for skipping class to smoke weed with my friends because I aced some test turned out to produce a university student who spent a lot of time partying.

I’ve changed a lot since then, and I do also have the blessing of being a rather natural and amiable person to talk too, but there was a long time where by sheer luck I was getting glided along because I ace tests like those and AP tests, but it certainly not indicative of someone who was going to spend a lot of time producing some great research paper in college or anything.

So I always thought it was kind of bullshit and I nailed the shit out of that test.

Probably just an imperfect science all in all. Much like hiring tech workers.

Edit: small grammatical errors, on a phone

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

#342

Post by chongli » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:38 PM UTC

barry-cotter wrote: post #334

chongli wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the reason the SATs are able to maintain a spread that lets them normalize the distribution is that they fill the tests with stupid tricks that fool people into wasting time. If you do a ton of prep then you learn to spot these tricks and then a lot of the questions become really easy and you can knock them off quickly. A poor smart student may have mastery of the material but their score will suffer if they…

And you can find out about all these tricks for free on Khan Academy or for $20 in a SAT prep book.

There are plenty of kids in the US who can't afford to bring lunch to school, let alone pay $20 for a SAT prep book. Many of these kids don't have a computer or Internet access at home for that matter, so Khan Academy isn't much good to them either. When we talk about rich vs poor kids, there's a HUGE gap that many people don't realize.

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

#343

Post by int_19h » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:39 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #39

neaden wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Right! I don't understand why people in this thread are apparently mad rich families for this? Like a family with means is doing all the things to raise a socialized, well rounded, experienced, well-read and tutored, worldly person. Like god damn I can't think of a better use for the money as a parent. I get that college admissions is a contest and performative but hot damn this thread is full of people mad at other…

People are mad, because that happiness comes at their expense. Not because rich people prep their kids per se, but because society is a zero-sum game in many ways, and the end result is a de facto caste system. People are often willing to endure unfair hardships, if their children get a better chance. But if they know that not even their great-grandchildren are likely to be significantly better off, the focus shifts back to here and now.

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

#344

Post by lmm » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:41 PM UTC

mekoka wrote: post #286

quartzite wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly correct. Those who fight for fair admissions on the basis of intellectual ability and academic potential should hold up the SAT and standardized testing as a cornerstone of the admissions process. Standardized testing significantly levels the playing field for students across income brackets. Returns on study investment quickly diminish, and reaching a plateau on returns doesn't require much investmen…

The premise of your answer is that MIT wants good "students" and "test takers". What if that's not what they want so much anymore? A test is supposed to be a metric, an indicator of something. But metrics tend to become target as soon as they're exposed. Maybe then they still remain an indicator of something, but not necessarily what they were originally intended to filter for. I understand that it might feel like th…

MIT has an obvious incentive to admit rich, well-connected people, and an obvious incentive to maintain a reputation for admitting the most intelligent on merit. We should be sceptical of any changes they make that purport to be about getting more meritorious students, especially if those changes result in the admission of more rich, well-connected people.

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

#345

Post by bobthepanda » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:45 PM UTC

MichaelDickens wrote: post #156

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this comment upvoted? MIT has not removed the requirement to take SAT tests. > We will continue to require the SAT or the ACT, because our research has shown these tests, in combination with a student’s high school grades and coursework, are predictive of success in our challenging curriculum. This is typical of a knee-jerk reaction without even understanding their policy. Let alone reading the actual post. It…

GP comment seems completely relevant to SAT subject tests to me. The point is that removing a test from consideration, even if it's not the only test considered, makes it easier for rich people to game the application process.

If the subject test was a thing that everyone was informed about, did not cost extra, and was readily available, if not required alongside standard SAT administration, then I would be more inclined to agree. But here knowing that they even exist is half the battle.

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

#346

Post by ummwhat » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:46 PM UTC

thebradbain wrote: post #254

quartzite wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly correct. Those who fight for fair admissions on the basis of intellectual ability and academic potential should hold up the SAT and standardized testing as a cornerstone of the admissions process. Standardized testing significantly levels the playing field for students across income brackets. Returns on study investment quickly diminish, and reaching a plateau on returns doesn't require much investmen…

The tests don't not work (I believe that within the middle of bell-curve they accomplish their goal well), but at the extremes they are prone to gamification, especially to those in the know. For example, the pre-2017 SAT had some well known (and some lesser known) tricks that you would only know by studying the test, rather than the material: - ALL sections (and sub-sections) have questions that strictly increase in…

Maybe this is will be seen as radical but I think the best way to end all this gaming is for collegeboard to not release their previous tests to the public. There simply shouldn't be enough data out there to study the test rather than the material. All that should be known in advance is the topics, format (multi choice v. Open ended) and point system. I'm sure the cottage industry of test prep companies would hate it, as would those that prefer studying the test to having merits, but those groups can pound sand.

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

#347

Post by bananamerica » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:47 PM UTC

codyb wrote: post #341

fallingknife wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's entirely the point. The people bitching about how the SAT isn't fair aren't smart poor people who are being beaten out by upper middle class losers, but rather upper middle class losers being beaten out by smart poor people. They tell themselves that the test isn't fair, but a part of them knows that they could never get into the 1500's even with all the prep in the world, so they try to get the admissions…

That’s nuts, I got a 1590 on my second try with a calculator that turned out to be missing batteries, the day after going to a friends house and drinking with my only prep being reading a few paragraphs from some big book. I had a lackluster performance on the new writing section the first time around or I wouldn’t have spent any time upping the original 1520 or whatever. The point is to brag a little yes because I r…

Congratulations, you’re probably very smart.

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

#348

Post by barry-cotter » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:47 PM UTC

mekoka wrote: post #286

quartzite wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly correct. Those who fight for fair admissions on the basis of intellectual ability and academic potential should hold up the SAT and standardized testing as a cornerstone of the admissions process. Standardized testing significantly levels the playing field for students across income brackets. Returns on study investment quickly diminish, and reaching a plateau on returns doesn't require much investmen…

The premise of your answer is that MIT wants good "students" and "test takers". What if that's not what they want so much anymore? A test is supposed to be a metric, an indicator of something. But metrics tend to become target as soon as they're exposed. Maybe then they still remain an indicator of something, but not necessarily what they were originally intended to filter for. I understand that it might feel like th…

Good test takers are people who have learned things and know them well enough to pass a test on it. There are many kinds of test. The SAT is the kind designed by psychometricians, experts with Ph.D.s building on millions of man hours of research to make tests that are both valid and reliable, that predict success in college and are as close to ungameable as possible.

MIT could drop the real SAT tomorrow and still fill its freshman class with valedictorians who captained their high school sports team and have ten AP 5s. Schools with fewer applicants have the SAT.

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

#349

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:47 PM UTC

devmunchies wrote: post #336

underpand wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As

maybe for low-level engineering drones who don't have any say in what gets built, which is typical for the first few years of an engineer's career. But senior engineers, and especially engineering management need to have good communications skills to work cross-functionally. Surely MIT would rather graduate future engineering leaders and technical founders and not just engineers.

[deleted]

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

#350

Post by ummwhat » Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 11:52 PM UTC

bsder wrote: post #232

quartzite wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly correct. Those who fight for fair admissions on the basis of intellectual ability and academic potential should hold up the SAT and standardized testing as a cornerstone of the admissions process. Standardized testing significantly levels the playing field for students across income brackets. Returns on study investment quickly diminish, and reaching a plateau on returns doesn't require much investmen…

I suspect this is just getting rid of redundancy. Everyone taking the SAT subject tests is probably taking the equivalent Advanced Placement test anyhow. However, the biggest problems with these tests (and the AP tests) is that they are expensive --they cost a non-trivial amount of money to sign up for and they cost a lot of time to prepare for if your school doesn't offer direct AP classes. The expensiveness is the…

My school had a deal where when you signed up for an AP class you had to take the AP test. But if you pass the AP test (3 or higher) the school would reimburse you. I took 5 tests and never paid for one. Including the one where we didn't have a teacher for half a year (long story).

I think this is the fairest way to do it. If you got talent but no money, the opportunity is still there.