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

UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 235 posts

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#151

Post by 1cvmask »

reactspa wrote: post #140
1cvmask wrote: post #16

These false flag diversity initiatives are there to entrench the privileged white elite who are threatened by the children of often 1st generation immigrants. From the article: UC admissions officers have said they were able to thoroughly evaluate the flood of applications without test scores, using 13 other factors in the system’s review process, such as a student’s high school grade-point average, the rigor of cour…

The only way to be color-blind is standardized tests. It's possible that standardized tests are biased. Then fix them! I didn't have rich parents. So I had never gone abroad. A rich parent can send their kids on "charity missions" to poor countries to rack up those "extra curricular points".

The white savior NGO charity complex. Poverty tourism is the hottest trend for white saviors and then the expectant applause.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#152

Post by dogma1138 »

addicted wrote: post #134
WalterBright wrote: post #40

From their criteria page: https://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/counselors/fres... "Special talents, achievements and awards in a particular field, such as visual and performing arts, communication or athletic endeavors; special skills, such as demonstrated written and oral proficiency in other languages; special interests, such as intensive study and exploration of other cultures; experiences that demonstrate…

I’m curious why we’d expect achievements in STEM at the age of 16/17, when students are applying for college. To keep this in perspective, kids haven’t even taken Science 101 at this point. And the exceptional students who have won Olympiad golds or created open source software, etc, would more than be covered by the “special talents, achievements and awards in any field” section.

Is this true? Not American when I was in school by 16 you would expected to know some physics, chemistry, biology and even computer science to some extent…

In physics 16 year olds have already been thought classical mechanics, optics and electro magnetism…

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#153

Post by WalterBright »

rsj_hn wrote: post #87
WalterBright wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are actually trained as engineers Caltech's engineering program doesn't actually train you to design machines, or how to operate a milling machine, or how to assemble an internal combustion engine. You can certainly get an engineering degree without ever getting grease under your fingernails. What it does do is teach you math. Every class is a math class. Statics, dynamics, newtonian mechanics, thermodynamics,…

You are using a lot of handwaving to try to get across the finish line. Let's tease this apart: 1. "math vs no-math". All engineers learn math. Some are afraid of it. At elite unis, it's fair to say those afraid are weeded out. That does not mean that most who attend mid-tier schools are afraid of math, or don't know math -- that's wildly false. 2. "engineering versus operating". Elite unis prepare you better to go i…

> That does not mean that most who attend mid-tier schools are afraid of math, or don't know math -- that's wildly false.

That logically does not follow from my statements. Mathematically, (A implies B) does not imply (not A implies not B).

> Yet you are pretending that research is engineering

Nope, that does not follow, either. Theory != research.

> Other schools teach you to build stuff and have less emphasis on theory

Operating a milling machine is an accurate summation for "building stuff". If you want to build stuff as an ME, you're going to have to learn how to use the machine tools.

> What's not fine is it often comes at the expense of knowing how to build or design things well.

Again, I specifically said Caltech didn't teach how to build or design. I also said that that part can be learned on the job, but that learning math on the job is something for unicorns.

> theoretically trained engineers tend to be quite condescending and arrogant, not realizing how poor their math knowledge actually is.

Yeah, well, I can vouch for the math skills of a BSME from Caltech are better than that of Masters degrees from other unis. Good enough to ace the math part of the GREs. PhD level is way beyond me, I topped out at variational calculus. I don't pretend to be a math major, that's also way beyond me. I didn't take any "math" classes beyond the required ones. I am certainly not a math whiz. I just had it beat into me in every class.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#154

Post by yardie »

youeseh wrote: post #110
TeeMassive wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been my impression from people who lived in China that guanxi (connections) is far more important than the Gaokao and the main difference between the have and the have-nots is whether you and or your parents have a permit to live in a city. When I bring the point of the standard exam as a great equalizer they immediately laughed and told me that the US is a egalitarian paradise compared to what goes on there.

My ex-boss is Chinese and this is what she had to say: The best universities in China are public universities. Performing competitively in the single standardized exam is the only ticket into the most competitive university programs. Everyone's results are posted publicly. The government works very hard to prevent cheating, or loss of trust in the exam or its results.

It's the same for most of Europe. The best universities are public. High scores on the placement exams puts you in the best universities. Private unis are seen as second tier, when the student has money but not the academics to get into a great school.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#155

Post by 1cvmask »

yardie wrote: post #148
reactspa wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way to be color-blind is standardized tests. It's possible that standardized tests are biased. Then fix them! I didn't have rich parents. So I had never gone abroad. A rich parent can send their kids on "charity missions" to poor countries to rack up those "extra curricular points".

It's not just possible the ubiquitous SAT was literally created by a white supremacist, Carl Brigham [0]. They are having a moment right now and trying to distance themselves from the racist part of their foundation. > It's possible that standardized tests are biased. Then fix them! We know they are biased but everytime the solution it's brought the solution is to replace them with another biased test. [0] https://ww…

There are plenty of foreign tests around the world where not a single white person was involved in devising them. And they are so so much harder, especially in mathematics, than the SAT.

Math tests are universally acknowledged to be neutral, even if hard. Most countries have standardized tests that have a spectrum of subjects covered. If you apply to say engineering only your Math and Science scores matter. If you apply to Literature only your language scores matter.

Maybe a good idea is to unbundle the English from the Math in the SAT and have two separate tests.

Language is definitely "subjective" and open to interpretation compared to Math. Maybe the bias you are referring to is in the English part.

-

I know people who still contribute to Planned Parenthood even though they know it's founder Margaret Singer was a racist and eugenist.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#156

Post by mateo1 »

anonuser123456 wrote: post #38

I for one welcome the UC systems choice to erode the signaling value of their degree. Hopefully more universities adopt this approach. Employers may in turn value said degrees less and eventually maybe we can burn down all of higher ed.

I wonder what kind of bizarre, dysfunctional thought process would lead one to desire the complete destruction of all higher education.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#158

Post by WalterBright »

addicted wrote: post #134
WalterBright wrote: post #40

From their criteria page: https://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/counselors/fres... "Special talents, achievements and awards in a particular field, such as visual and performing arts, communication or athletic endeavors; special skills, such as demonstrated written and oral proficiency in other languages; special interests, such as intensive study and exploration of other cultures; experiences that demonstrate…

I’m curious why we’d expect achievements in STEM at the age of 16/17, when students are applying for college. To keep this in perspective, kids haven’t even taken Science 101 at this point. And the exceptional students who have won Olympiad golds or created open source software, etc, would more than be covered by the “special talents, achievements and awards in any field” section.

> I’m curious why we’d expect achievements in STEM at the age of 16/17, when students are applying for college.

A student in my dorm had designed and built a computer using random TTL chips while in high school. Me, I'd torn a car completely to pieces, rebuilt the engine, and put it back together.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#159

Post by sokoloff »

alphabettsy wrote: post #74
rsj_hn wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's great if your only requirement is to train software developers to write CRUD apps - you can learn to do that by watching youtube videos, reading self-study materials, and taking MOOC classes - but if you want mechanical engineers, chemical engineers, electrical engineers, and be a leader in materials science or chip manufacturing, then you still need universities. So the price of this "equity" movement is goin…

I don’t believe objective measures of intelligence tell you all that much about someone. There are plenty of extremely intelligent people who for various reasons accomplish nothing and plenty of dropouts bringing enormous value to the world.

I don’t think objective measures of physical strength tell you much about someone either, but if you’re testing strength to find the strongest people (for whatever reason), I’d still recommend using standardized methods.

Re: UC slams the door on standardized admissions tests, nixing any SAT alternative

#160

Post by sokoloff »

ngc248 wrote: post #108
WalterBright wrote: post #75

"UC admissions officers have said they were able to thoroughly evaluate the flood of applications without test scores" Of course, there's no way to determine if they were thorough or not.

hahah .... who will evaluate the evaluator's evaluations? Seems to be extremely subjective. May be they should go with a 50/50 split for SAT and the subjective criteria. This won't be perfect but both camps would be covered.

I’d love to see 2/3rds of the class admitted on long-standing, well-tested policies and the remainder allocated via whatever other processes the school wants to test.

Want to let in 1/9th via pure random lottery? Have at it!

Want to let in 1/9th via racial or socioeconomic profiling? Have at it!

Then look at successful completion rates of year 1, degree by year 4, degree by year 5, and position (as self-reported) 10 years after admission for each group.

Either we’ll discover that there’s a better way to do admissions or we’ll discover that the current way is close to optimal.

Post reply on HN