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

Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 647 posts

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#151

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

nishs wrote: post #146
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As noted in the sibling comment - this has already been implemented in Texas for almost 30 years now. While studying the outcomes and the way it was implemented is an exercise for the reader, it's hardly the silver bullet your comment makes it out to be.

I found this criticism of the Robin Hood plan: https://www.keranews.org/archive/2005-12-12/texas-schools-an... . Let's examine the substance of the points the article makes. > Yet when the money is being transferred to other districts, it becomes a state issue and is therefore a state property tax, which is illegal in Texas. Ah, geez. > Furthermore, taking funds from one district to another makes accountability for f…

Agree that both the Wikipedia article I linked and the article you linked are not very good. FWIW, the state property tax illegality issue was somehow addressed shortly after the article you linked was written via some legislation that lowered the minimum obligation to the state and awarded local jurisdictions more leeway to levy their own taxes instead.

Here is a more recent article with some numbers that I linked in a sibling comment that details how Texas has essentially painted itself into a corner with Robin Hood funding: https://www.texastribune.org/2019/01/31/texas-robin-hood-rec...

Everyone seems to acknowledge that its current implementation is somewhat problematic but there really isn't a clear path forward for resolving the issues with the system that is tenable in the current Texas political and legal climate.

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#152

Post by dahfizz »

charlesju wrote: post #89
dahfizz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how taking more advanced classes and scoring well is "gaming" your GPA. You are legitimately taking harder / more in depth classes and performing well. The fact that your GPA is higher as a result seems legitimate. You can argue about availability of AP classes / funding / etc, but that doesn't detract from the hard work of the AP students. Plenty of rich white kids take hard AP classes and get D's.

Given 2 equally smart people. The one that has the opportunity to take more AP/Honors will have more opportunity to get a higher GPA.

And as a result, the person who took more Honors classes will be "more educated" (assuming the Honors / AP classes succeed in their stated goal). Therefore, the student that took the Honors classes is more competitive.

It comes back to the question of what universities should prioritize. Should they be optimizing for the fairest / most equal student body, or the most gifted / competitive student body?

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#153

Post by 908B64B197 »

throwaway284534 wrote: post #140
908B64B197 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All this gnashing over test scores and booster programs is just showboating. If states really want to fix poor schools they should make school funding occur at the state level Does spending per pupil even correlates with outcomes? > rather than whichever random zip code you’re born into. Is it random or the result of the parents hard work?

I think there’s several issues going. The first is a lack of funding in poor schools. Less money, less resources. The second is that just having money doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be managed well by the administration. Maybe that too needs some amount of state oversight. Lastly, the phrase “parents’ hard work” implies a lot about the core problem here. It’s no secret that wealthy families have a multi-gener…

> The first is a lack of funding in poor schools. Less money, less resources.

Are they really less funded? Interestingly, poorer schools are often eligible for state and federal grants.

> The second is that just having money doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be managed well by the administration.

That's interesting.

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#154

Post by charlesju »

threatofrain wrote: post #148
charlesju wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given 2 equally smart people. The one that has the opportunity to take more AP/Honors will have more opportunity to get a higher GPA.

Gaming implies that your metrics are being ruined by moving towards an opposite effect, not that they fail to be perfect. Similarly, doing well in the IMO could be a predictor of wealth and circumstance, but it's also a signal for math talent. If we're saying that AP tests and classes are too easy, then of course people can have a discussion about increasing difficulty.

All I know is there are trivial AP classes like AP Government, AP Econ, AP Art, AP Computer Science, etc. at my school. Almost everyone got an A and a 4 or 5 on the test.

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#155

Post by usaar333 »

jessaustin wrote: post #130

It's possible that dropping standardized tests will have the demographic effects that TFA fears, but it isn't certain. Standardized tests aren't the only reason that Asian-Americans are "over"-represented and other groups are "under"-represented. Another reason is that Asian-Americans are good students. Standardized test scores are not the only indicator of that. Of course, the people who have decided to drop these t…

We already know what happened as 2021 data is out:

Applications: https://ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/co...

Admissions: https://ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/co...

System-wide, any demographic change looks insignificant. No change at Berkeley (which had already increased SES weighing in 2020). UCLA slightly boosted URG, but it looks like some of that might have been application demographic changes (which removing the SAT might have caused to some degree - a small number of students may be discouraged by it)

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#156

Post by usaar333 »

jlangemeier wrote: post #93

Higher Ed Number cruncher here (who also read the report, which apparently was a big deal to the author since they cited the page count - and many of their arguments hinge on you taking their word for it and not reading at least the exec summary yourself - which is only 8 pages): So, fun thing about the actual study that the author references... the committee actually __DIDN'T__ tell UC regents to not get rid of the…

> So, by using AAPI students as a proxy argument for their weird screed at the end while leaving off factors like what percentage of that UG population is in-state v. out-of-state v. international does a disservice to that over/under-represented claim; while also leaving them off of the earlier analysis pieces moves the slant of the article in a weird way.

UC reports international students separately. They also have dedicated reports for CA. Here's the CA admissions data: https://ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/_f...

> For further reference; AAPI students are __NOT__ included in Underrepresented Minority (URM) calculations - even though in many cases a layperson __WOULD__ include them;

Not in higher ed.

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#157

Post by dahfizz »

throwaway284534 wrote: post #140
908B64B197 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All this gnashing over test scores and booster programs is just showboating. If states really want to fix poor schools they should make school funding occur at the state level Does spending per pupil even correlates with outcomes? > rather than whichever random zip code you’re born into. Is it random or the result of the parents hard work?

I think there’s several issues going. The first is a lack of funding in poor schools. Less money, less resources. The second is that just having money doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be managed well by the administration. Maybe that too needs some amount of state oversight. Lastly, the phrase “parents’ hard work” implies a lot about the core problem here. It’s no secret that wealthy families have a multi-gener…

> The first is a lack of funding in poor schools. Less money, less resources.

Source? We spend more and more on education every year with nothing to show for it[1][2]. Throwing more money at students absolutely does not mean they will be more successful[3]. This is not a problem that can be solved with money.

[1] https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/edlite-chart....

[2] https://reason.org/commentary/inflation-adjusted-k-12-educat...

[3] https://foxbaltimore.com/news/project-baltimore/baltimore-ci...

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#158

Post by chriswarbo »

Aperocky wrote: post #19
lokar wrote: post #6

There is no real evidence for the idea that a difference in scores predicts a difference in performance, once you are above some threshold. They should keep the test, but use a threshold (per major and school) with a lottery for everyone above the threshold. And admit a small number below at random to keep evaluating what the threshold should be.

I don't understand why lottery are used so much in official context. Instead of the best, you select randomly and hoping RNGesus is on your side. I agree about the threshold, but how about using other criterias instead of RNG.

One advantage of lotteries is that they remove competition and 'arms races', since there's no way to affect the outcome (ideally; modulo hacking, etc.). Once you're over the threshold, you might as well focus your remaining time and effort on other things; rather than spending more money on 'interview technique coaching', or hiring more proof-readers, or rephrasing the same sentence over and over for months in an attempt to get it 'perfect'.

Not only do lotteries mitigate Goodhart's Law (which rewards 'bad' candidates who appear good, whilst punishing 'good' candidates who don't appear that way); but even a perfect, un-gameable measure can waste resources chasing diminishing returns. Even something as trivial as spelling mistakes can be decisive; and whilst those judging might only care a little about spelling, candidates care a lot about winning, so it's in their interest to obsess over even such minor things.

This imposes a massive opportunity cost, whether it's spending whole childhoods in 'cram schools'; or university salaries going to 'grant proposal writing services' rather than educators and researchers; etc.

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#159

Post by jlangemeier »

usaar333 wrote: post #156
jlangemeier wrote: post #93

Higher Ed Number cruncher here (who also read the report, which apparently was a big deal to the author since they cited the page count - and many of their arguments hinge on you taking their word for it and not reading at least the exec summary yourself - which is only 8 pages): So, fun thing about the actual study that the author references... the committee actually __DIDN'T__ tell UC regents to not get rid of the…

> So, by using AAPI students as a proxy argument for their weird screed at the end while leaving off factors like what percentage of that UG population is in-state v. out-of-state v. international does a disservice to that over/under-represented claim; while also leaving them off of the earlier analysis pieces moves the slant of the article in a weird way. UC reports international students separately. They also have…

> UC reports international students separately. [sic]

The report cited in the article isn't as clear on their distinction and in some cases the numbers indicate that the comparisons are among feeder, in-state high schools; and others are general enough that the lack of detail is concerning as the study leaves out the total population and only provides percentages.

> Not in higher ed.

While the common/colloquial understanding through recent years shows that Asian students are more represented in higher ed; the general notion of what URM is codified as in higher ed contexts is less known; and wasn't clearly defined in the article. And I initially spoke too broadly, as the PI (pacific islander) portion of AAPI is included in URM, the Asian portion is not; and the PI portion is not mention anywhere in the article; and with AAPI discrimination being in the current cultural Zeitgeist, if that distinction goes unmentioned it's a leading statement.

Re: Why is the university of California dropping the SAT?

#160

Post by exolymph »

charlesju wrote: post #89
dahfizz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how taking more advanced classes and scoring well is "gaming" your GPA. You are legitimately taking harder / more in depth classes and performing well. The fact that your GPA is higher as a result seems legitimate. You can argue about availability of AP classes / funding / etc, but that doesn't detract from the hard work of the AP students. Plenty of rich white kids take hard AP classes and get D's.

Given 2 equally smart people. The one that has the opportunity to take more AP/Honors will have more opportunity to get a higher GPA.

And that betrays the whole game, right? It's not about teaching knowledge. It's about filtering and sorting people into legible strata for employers.

That and babysitting so parents can work without their kids setting the house on fire.

Post reply on HN