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

MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions

mitadmissions.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 465 posts

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

#401

Post by wolco »

barry-cotter wrote: post #380
saagarjha wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. This is what the CollegeBoard wants you think. You don’t have to be all that great to realize that the people writing the test are hardly better than you are at both the subject…

They’re hiring two Ph.D. holding psychometricians right now. https://careers.collegeboard.org/search-jobs?title=Psychomet... In many cases, not, in many case.

Assistant? Associate?

The titles don't give too much confidence.

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

#403

Post by wolco »

alistairSH wrote: post #367
underpand wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPA is already scaled based on income because poor schools give higher GPAs for the same level of knowledge and skill. The study is useless.

While I've heard that said, I've never seen proof that grades are inflated at poor schools. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't actually the opposite, as helicopter parents and their ambitious students are more able (more free time) to self-promote and argue their way into higher grades.

Grades are more inflated at rich school. The presure teachers are under is great. For private school, if parents can get better grades elsewhere they will move them.

The material may be easier in a poor school and an average student can seem amazing compared to a below average student.

The rich dumb, poor smart both come in from behind the eightball. Rich can buy there way out and poor can work there way in. If I'm mit I want rich smart.. seems less risky.

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

#404

Post by pdonis »

adamsea wrote: post #395
pdonis wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that "articulate, socially well-adjusted person who can communicate their values and opinions in an intelligent way and who is comfortable making connections with others" is (a) highly subjective, and (b) only a means to an end. The end is to have a productive civil society where people do not prey on other people. Unfortunately, all these highly subjective characteristics are used by people to prey on…

Distrusting social skills, linguistic ability, and emotional intelligence doesn't sound like a recipe for success. It's not like there aren't plenty of engineers, scientists, math folks, i.e. those "honest", quantitative folks, who aren't also crappy or deceptive people. Just look at Facebook! ;)

> Distrusting social skills, linguistic ability, and emotional intelligence doesn't sound like a recipe for success.

It's not a matter of "trusting" vs. "distrusting" them. It's a matter of what universities (and other exclusive institutions, for that matter) select for. If you select for "social skills, linguistic ability, and emotional intelligence" without also having any objective way of measuring actual productive potential, not to mention evaluating a person's actual willingness to use their talents in support of a cooperative civil society, you're going to get a lot of people who will be very good at preying on others and using the system they are gaining entrance to as a tool to that end.

> It's not like there aren't plenty of engineers, scientists, math folks, i.e. those "honest", quantitative folks, who aren't also crappy or deceptive people

Yes, that's true, but without those social skills they do a lot less damage, because they can't get very many people to interact with them.

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

#405

Post by cogntive_elite »

buzzy_hacker wrote: post #246
opportune wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is true about the SAT but the subject tests are kind of niche and I assume a lot of poor people actually don't know about them. If you're not in an environment where a lot of people are applying to top schools, it's unlikely to be something you are familiar with

That’s a good point I hadn’t considered, they are fairly niche

Top schools are more than fairly niche, especialy at the very top of the very top like MIT, which is extremeley niche.

Source: I was a poor kid who got into UC Berkeley based largely on my SAT II scores.

Any poor kid seriously considering applying to MIT or Cal is high information enough to be aware SAT IIs exist.

Do ya'll understand how patronizing and insulting this bigotry of low expectations is to brilliant trailer park trash kids like 1990s me?

PS I'm rich and early retired now thanks to (Bitcoin and) setting/enforcing high standards for myself, not lowered expectations.

I didn't have $20 to spend on an SAT prep book, so I checked some out from the HS library. It wasn't hard, it simply took initiative.

SAT IIs let applicants pick an area in which they can shine above and beyond the genereic g-weighted diagnostic.

My gifts are largely verbal, so the Writing subject test was my once-in-a-lifetime to demonstrate objective superiority to my peer group, regardless of income and race.

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

#407

Post by ollien »

80386 wrote: post #389
RandallBrown wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because many (most?) people don't take or know about the subject tests. I thought I had never heard of them, but after looking at wikipedia, it looks like they were called the SAT II when I was in high school. I remember that existing, but never knew why you would take them and never knew anybody that did. It's not a stretch to imagine people being confused. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_Subject_Tests

SAT IIs are pretty obscure, and I don't think there's any benefit to taking them over AP tests, since APs can sometimes be translated into college credits and have much more support in public schools. One of the points of metrics is to reduce the relevance of how savvy your parents are. But you have to have pretty savvy parents to take the SAT IIs. Metrics get a lot of heat from people who don't realize what the alte…

It's been a few years since I applied to college, but subject tests were nice because they showed a baseline for certain subjects that didn't really have AP exams (e.g. Math II is everything through pre-calculus). You can also take them more than once, unlike AP exams. Also, you don't send "official" AP scores to college admissions; you only do that once you're admitted, since they actually go to the registrar, not admissions. You simply self-report AP scores otherwise.

I feel like there are other benefits that I'm forgetting, but those come to mind immediately.

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

#408

Post by zarify »

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…

Alternatively it could be objection to numerous examples of somewhat arbitrary standardised testing which takes over student education to the exclusion of pretty much anything else, limiting a lot of the creativity and enjoyment students might otherwise take part it.

But that's just my cynical educator's view.

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

#409

Post by joshvm »

Oxford also tried something similar by implementing their own entrance tests for engineering and physics (and other subjects). The idea was to stop private school kids with straight A GCSEs and A-levels from dominating. The entrance tests are supposed to be harder to prepare for, and therefore fairer - all that did was force the rich kids to get tutors and the situation remains largely the same.

One of the main reasons I didn't apply to the US for grad school is having to sit through the GRE (which I had no time to prepare for during my final year) and then to redo all my Masters courses because the US doesn't recognise foreign qualifications. Virtually anywhere else in the world you can convert your grades to local standard, and a masters is a masters. At grad level an interview is much more useful to gauge ability, as grades are a poor predictor of research output.

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

#410

Post by mygo »

cogntive_elite wrote: post #405
buzzy_hacker wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a good point I hadn’t considered, they are fairly niche

Top schools are more than fairly niche, especialy at the very top of the very top like MIT, which is extremeley niche. Source: I was a poor kid who got into UC Berkeley based largely on my SAT II scores. Any poor kid seriously considering applying to MIT or Cal is high information enough to be aware SAT IIs exist. Do ya'll understand how patronizing and insulting this bigotry of low expectations is to brilliant trail…

> I was a poor kid who got into UC Berkeley based largely on my SAT II scores.

So did the admissions officer mail you a letter that said “congrats! Based largely on your SAT II scores, you’ve gotten in!”

If not, what enables you to discount the possibility that you still would have gotten in without the subject test?

Post reply on HN