Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005) • Hacker News Board

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#281

Post by ForHackernews » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:05 PM UTC

murgindrag wrote: post #263

rhino369 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the scientific consensus says they aren't in the same galaxy as ranking 99.9997% to 99.9998%. SAT, for example, is better than grades are predicting first year GPA, but it's still not that great.

My point wasn't about the level of validity. My point about making inane comments. OP claimed we don't know things which we DO know simply because OP hasn't bothered to look. Your numbers, 99.9997% to 99.9998%, roughly ask whether we can distinguish the second-best student in America from the fourth-best with an SAT. I'm not quite sure anyone is either using the SAT for that, or claiming it's a helpful tool for that.…

Harvard, Yale, etc. absolutely are claiming that they can separate the 2000th "best" student who gets in from the 2001st student who doesn't. If they wanted to fill their freshman classes entirely with valedictorians with perfect SAT scores, they have the applicant pool to do that.

My assertion is that there's no way for them to accurately make distinctions that fine. Much more honest to set some bar of "you must be at least this proficient to perform academically at Yale" and then pull names out of a hat containing everyone who meets that standard.

As it stands, the current admissions regime looks designed to reify class privileges in America.

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#282

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #226

jldugger wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously your family moves freshman year to optimize your chance of getting into UT /s

I’ve had plenty of discussions with people on how they plan to move from starter homes to homes in more affluent areas so their kids can mingle with richer kids and go to their schools.

Cheapest house on the block is where the smartest people live.

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#283

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:07 PM UTC

bumby wrote: post #265

tyingq wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean bottom of the rung, E1. You can do 2 years of community college and enter a couple of ranks higher.

If rank was the only factor, that’s a bad choice considering you can fairly easily make that same rank in less time by simply enlisting.

Community college is a lot more pleasant than military sevice.

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#284

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:11 PM UTC

hakfoo wrote: post #246

hardwaregeek wrote: post #130

One interesting example is the UT system. Because affirmative action was banned in Hopwood v. Texas, the UT system resorted to a program where they accept the top 10% of each high school's class into all UT schools. It's an interesting way of doing admissions, albeit not perfect. One critique that I'm anticipating seeing is that this encourages going to a mediocre high school. Except...getting good students to go to…

Any "top nn%" rule asks for another form of toxic gaming of the system. At least back around the turn of the century, in Arizona, the state universities gave a full tuition waiver for the top 25 or 33% of the graduating class. (Not sure if they still do) This seems at its face to be a very inclusive goal-- you'd make the program accessible to students regardless of finances. But some schools were so aggressive on the…

That's not a problem with the admission system, that's a problem with the scholarship being underfunded. If 33% is missing people, go to 50%. This idea that college admissions should be competitive is absolutely toxic

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#285

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #205

hardwaregeek wrote: post #130

One interesting example is the UT system. Because affirmative action was banned in Hopwood v. Texas, the UT system resorted to a program where they accept the top 10% of each high school's class into all UT schools. It's an interesting way of doing admissions, albeit not perfect. One critique that I'm anticipating seeing is that this encourages going to a mediocre high school. Except...getting good students to go to…

Bad schools are made of bad policy, not bad kids.

And poor or uneducated parents.

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#286

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:14 PM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #138

abeppu wrote: post #126

A bunch of commenters here have gotten fixated on two questions: (a) "meritocracy" and what it means or should mean and (b) whether the value of top colleges derives mainly from being exclusive. I think an interesting / illustrative case is the AMA as the credentialing authority for medical schools. An association of people in the profession, who have a clear interest in the supply of doctors being low, has a clear l…

The AMA doesn't restrict the number of people in medical school, you're thinking of residency slots, and they don't restrict that either. They're in favor of expanding the number of residencies available since everyone knows there is a shortage of doctors. The restriction comes from funding since it's all Federal dollars to pay for the training. https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-bui... Congress…

Why do federal dollars pay for all the training?

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#287

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #122

murgindrag wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that exactly what I wrote? The whole point of elite schools is to give rich people appearance of intelligence by association. If you take 2000 valedictorians and 500 rich douchebags, have the 500 rich douchebags pay to educate the whole lot, and everyone comes out with a common brand stamp, who benefits? Answer: Everyone involved! Taking away federal funding (as if that were politically possible) would slow it…

> Answer: Everyone involved! What about the rest of us? Did we benefit that George Bush (who claimed never to read a book at Yale) got the certification of an elite degree? What you are saying is the equivalent of saying everyone in the mafia benefited by being part of the mafia. And btw before anyone talks about how Yale (or any other elite school) is private and can make their own decisions - no - they receive MASS…

The feds are paying for research, not George's tuition. George didn't need a scholarship.

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#288

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

rhino369 wrote: post #159

newen wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that GWB went to Yale made it possible for him to become President. Elite schools make it easier for people who have money (but aren’t too academically inclined) to get into positions of political power by building credentials and connecting with a community of smart people.

I bet it wouldn't really have hurt GWB to have gone to UT-Austin instead. Especially if all the other rich kids stopped getting accepted (so he wouldn't stand out). He got jobs and power because his daddy was President. Not because he went to Yale. I think these schools think its the opposite. They'd rather have someone who already has power within their network.

Yale gave him fake credibility because it's uncouth to vote for or start a business with a trust fund baby for no other reason than that.

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#289

Post by bumby » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #279

bumby wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you can if what is meant by “a couple ranks higher” means a couple enlisted ranks. This can occur before leaving for basic. You can be guaranteed E3 out of boot camp with enlistment incentives and each platoon generally has at least one merit promotion E3 (aka ‘honor grad’)

Right, and all the programs I referred to are also guaranteed promotion after Basic as well. But you'll still be an E-1 in Basic and so if you are looking at some outstanding scores on something posted for E-1s in Basic, well, it's possible those E-1s are people who enlisted with a guarantee of higher grade on successful completion of Basic, not starting at the bottom except insofar as everyone enlisting starts at th…

It's potentially different for each branch, but the Navy advertises higher rank prior to completion of basic:

"The Navy provides opportunities for you to advance to pay-grades E-2 or E-3 while you wait to leave for boot camp."[1]

My limited understanding is you are paid the higher rank salary while in training but cannot wear the rank until graduation.

[1]https://www.navycs.com/navy-advanced-paygrade.html

Re: Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of ‘good enough’ (2005)

#290

Post by sukilot » Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

34679 wrote: post #59

Top colleges should stop treating admissions like a limited release beer - driving up prices with intentional shortages - and build some damn classrooms.

Society needs to stop treating top colleges like limited release beer.

It's not Harvard's job to run college for the whole country.