Live data from Hacker News

Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

wsj.com

221–230 of 568 posts

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#221
post #213
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there’s a silver lining to all of this behavior in that it demonstrates that nothing really matters when it comes to determining if you’ll be successful in college. Test scores don’t prove much except who had the resources, time, and motivation to study the most. You could replace the SAT and ACT with obscure movie trivia and you’d see roughly the same distribution of scores and it would have the same predict…

> Test scores don’t prove much except who had the resources, time, and motivation to study the most. I was under the impression that SAT prep doesn't move the needle much. Am I mistaken?

Cramming for the test right at the end with SAT prep will add a few points but won’t do anything dramatic.

But if you get put in the “honors” track of a lot of high schools where the name of the game is to teach material informed by the SAT, ACT, AP, and IB teats then you almost can’t help but do well since you’ve been cramming for 4 years.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#222
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The SAT has always generally been a test showing how well you prepared for the SAT. I don't know about the SAT specifically, but in my country we also have standardized admission tests and, from my appreciation, it's good at measuring 2 things: 1. General Intelligence. 2. How well you prepared for the test. Sure, (2) may be an undesirable artifact but I think that intelligence is a good way --if not the best-- to s…

2 isn't an undesirable artifact. You want highly motivated hard working people applying to your university course. People have this idea of some genius slacker but you know what's better than a genius slacker? A genius who works hard. And frankly, most people aren't geniuses anyway.

People think smart kids with lower-middle-class parents are losing out on college places to kids whose rich parents can afford $$$$ tuition at the crème-de-la-crème school for the rich and thick.

And that's both inefficient as we're not sending our best students to our best schools; and bad for social mobility as it makes it harder for those born poor-but-smart to improve their lot in life.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#223

I highly recommend watching the video by Scott Galloway on The College Implosion. [1] "Colleges have become luxury brands and are adopting a strategy of artificial scarcity to create irrational margins" There's a large movement right now where many are saying the large tuition fees for Zoom lectures aren't worth it. Colleges sell themselves for the experience and are a luxury lifestyle brand almost, but with covid th…

I know most people on this forum are computer scientists but take a minute to think about engineers and scientists that require physical labs to learn. Bio/chem labs, machine shops, wind tunnels, research facilities... not all university degrees can be moved online.

CS is basically the only "useful" bachelors degree I've seen that's been widely implemented online. When I looked at going hack to school, the schools offering online degrees typically had a "meh" CS program and a variety of degrees that were in subjects not really opening you up to useful of even interesting employment. Also wayyy to many IT type degrees, which feel like a scam to me. I was under the impression that certifications are the big credentials for IT fields. Why pay tens of thousands for a degree program when you could put much less money into studying and achieving relevant certs.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#224
post #204

Harvard can be corrupt. There's a very average girl in my town who wouldn't get admitted to grad school at Harvard if her dad wasn't a law professor at Harvard. Regarding asians. It's not about race. Diversity in academia is important for many reasons. It's not about being asian, it's about living in a rich family at a top school district, regardless of your race. A poor kid from a bad neighborhood cannot compete wit…

"I have a very average girl in my town who got admitted to grad school at Harvard only because her dad is a law professor at Harvard." I'm not saying Harvard isn't corrupt, but admitting professor's kid isn't really the best indicator of corruption. It's nothing unusual in many schools and they don't hide it.

Not hiding it doesn't mean it's OK. Maybe corrupt is not the right word but it's not that important. Things like this are exactly what people are talking about when they protest against privilege.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#225
post #194
post #115

I have a hard time understanding the logic here. GPAs are essentially useless, so what else do we have to go off of? "Hollistic admissions" processes seem to be even more skewed towards rich kids, as they have far greater opportunities outside of the class room to pad their resumes in exactly the way that colleges look for. This seems entirely backwards to me. If there is a systemic bias in test scores, it is still b…

Dumb question, but are GPAs useless? I mean a plot of say high school GPA vs say college graduation rate or college GPA would be rather informative.

> I mean a plot of say high school GPA vs say college graduation rate or college GPA would be rather informative.

You'd have to be very careful in how to measure both the inputs and the outputs.

First, "weighting" makes high school GPAs pretty difficult to interpret without a lot of context. This is compounded by the fact that "weighting" is a bad solution to the underlying problem of trying to compare fundamentally incomparable coursework. There's really no numerical way to compare a grade in a remedial Biology course to a grade in an AP Biology course.

Second, grading varies wildly from school to school and teacher to teacher, and what an "A" means will also vary wildly. Some teachers emphasize understanding, some emphasize busy work, and some hand of "A"s like candy. To give one example that might be useful to the HN audience: I've volunteered in several AP CS courses:

- In one course, getting an "A" required writing thousands upon thousands of lines of if-else conditions following inane string formatting guidelines. Barely any looping. AFAICT the teacher was the least competent math teacher that was removed from teaching any math courses that were tested for in state standardized tests (never taught algebra or geometry -- just all the random remedial courses and electives).

- In another course, getting an "A" required writing real programs, using some data structures appropriately, knowing the difference between constant/linear/"not linear" algorithm, etc. Students even wrote some simple proofs. Teacher was a CS major.

- In a third course, basically everyone got in "A". Teacher was, I shit you not, a gym teacher. Literally a warm body. Course was basically self-study on days I wasn't there.

So, even in relatively "standardized" AP courses, there's often not a nice bell curve, teachers aren't using the same rubrics or even assignments, and you really have no clue whether that grading reflects ability to put up with bullshit busywork or actual understanding.

Third, you also have to be careful about how you're measuring the results. College GPA and graduation rates are not field-agnostic. A 4.0 in CS or Physics or Math is not easily comparable to a 4.0 in Communications. Also, universities aren't comparable. A degree/GPA at Small Noncompetitive Liberal Arts College is simply not comparable to a degree/GPA at MIT or Stanford.

Also, dropping your lucrative major for a useless major can have an even bigger impact on your life than dropping out. The number of people who start in STEM and end up with a Communications or Business degree is just as relevant, or arguably even more relevant, than the number of Communications or Business majors who end up without a degree.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#226
post #115

I have a hard time understanding the logic here. GPAs are essentially useless, so what else do we have to go off of? "Hollistic admissions" processes seem to be even more skewed towards rich kids, as they have far greater opportunities outside of the class room to pad their resumes in exactly the way that colleges look for. This seems entirely backwards to me. If there is a systemic bias in test scores, it is still b…

How else are you going to keep the Asians out?

I'm a bit confused, but isn't this a one year response to the effects of Covid? I saw that there were difficulties even with AP exams this year.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The competitive admissions high school I went to (which has an SAT average similar to Ivy League universities) has a completely race/SES-blind admissions system and is now 70% Asian.

That's a function of local demographics as well though. Lowell high school in San Francisco has those numbers but that's in part due to (more affluent than average) whites long fleeing the SF public schools.

But whites still are the majority in SF by a huge margin.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#228
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very cynical answer to what's the logic here: objective measures get in the way of many non-academic college admission goals, so colleges want to do away with them. One of those goals is racial diversity, and that's the only one colleges openly talk about because it's the only one that can positively impact society. Other goals include raising more money by admitting the children of major donors, improving the pres…

>improving the prestige of the college by admitting top athletes What's the logic here? I'll admit I'm not a big fan of college sports myself, but who assesses the credibility of a college by their athletics program?

I think athletic success increases the awareness of the college among potential applicants, more people apply, the selectivity percentage goes down, the college looks more selective from a naive perspective used by college ranking formulas, its ranking increases, and thus its prestige increases.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you mention here is more of a cultural thing.In some, there's emphasis,if not obsession, to make sure the kids do learn so they could go to college/university/whatever. This is also pushed quite heavily at family level too. This may not be the same in other groups.

Its also pushing kids into career directions that they may not really want to do and in some cases are not just suited to. The only time I have seen some one who was just not suited to development was case of this.

I have a cousin, who's both parents are heavily into medicine and wanted for him the same path,while he only wanted to do anything related to cars. Didn't work out well tbh. Pushing your own kids to learn isn't necessarily a bad thing,but to do so purely with a single goal of getting them into a university and then in a predefined job path, is outright crazy.

Re: Harvard University Won’t Require SAT, ACT for Admissions Next Year

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a function of local demographics as well though. Lowell high school in San Francisco has those numbers but that's in part due to (more affluent than average) whites long fleeing the SF public schools.

But whites still are the majority in SF by a huge margin.

? Have you ever been to SF? That's not true for the general population and even less true for youth. And the white youth that are there tend to go to private schools

https://priceonomics.com/where-are-all-the-white-people-in-s....

Post reply on HN