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

Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

robkhenderson.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 684 posts

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#161

Post by IshKebab »

mrangle wrote: post #143
ww520 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they are so qualified, why not let them compete on the even ground with the rest of the applicants? Why is there a need to special track them via legacy? Legacy should have been abolished long time ago. It’s the epitome of systematic racism.

You seem to have missed the point of my prior post, and you misunderstand how legacy admissions work. Dropping the rhetorical nuke of "systemic racism" doesn't cover for that. Read my prior post again. Legacy gets one looked at. Its not an automatic admission. Unlesss you are simply stating that legacy admissions should be disqualified (this would be ridiculous), then also consider that: you may be making the "resear…

> Legacy gets one looked at

I'm not that familiar with the US legacy system but even if it is just "we'll definitely take a look at your application" that isn't competing on even ground is it?

It might not guarantee you a place but it's clearly an unfair advantage.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#162

Post by nemo44x »

mrangle wrote: post #113
nemo44x wrote: post #11

When universities drop standardized testing but keep legacy admissions it tells you all you need to know.

There are no bottom-barrel legacy admissions. The "club", which includes the assurance of giving legacies a hard look, is largely why these Universities are desirable for non-legacy candidates. In general, but also University depending, the education itself is nothing that can't be attained at many liberal arts colleges.

It’s about the connections, not the content. It’s about being with a cohort of people that can play at your level and share ambitions. Rubbing shoulders with rich kids who are average isn’t as useful as you make it out. Rich people will invest in smart kids that have the prestige of a top university with or without their own kids being connected to them.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#163

Post by hedora »

nervousvarun wrote: post #122
ryzvonusef wrote: post #45

As an Asian person, I think it's a cultural thing. There is this old joke about how even if you are a one-in-a-million person, there are still 8000 of "you"s to choose from; how does one chose who to pick, if there aren't positions for all of them? So how do you make it "fair"? Since of the number of seats are limited, so imagine if the cut-off for the last seat is for someone who is in the 90.3765335th percentile, l…

You've articulated this very well. It's something I also have for years believed as a non-Asian person that has become a "conceptual framework" (my words...probably inadequate) to better understand Asian co-workers now and co-students back in my school days (to unfortunately generalize here). For me at least it really does explain a lot of the cultural differences that lead to lazy western stereotypes. So many exampl…

This happens in the US too though. We have about 10% as many people, so for undergrads, it’s really just ~ one more level of applicant filtering than we have in the US.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#164

Post by pmoriarty »

whack wrote: post #120

The following paragraphs were especially powerful: > The chattering class is using poor kids as pawns to eliminate standardized testing. Which helps their own kids. Rich kids who “don’t test well.” But they know how to strategically boost their GPAs, get recommendation letters from important people, stack their resumes with extracurriculars, and use the right slogans in their admissions essays. They have “polish.” >…

"Or ban legacy preferences at the very least"

It would be interesting if there was a rule that forbid you from attending the same school as your parents.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#165

Post by petilon »

There is this belief among some, that the wealthy have an advantage when it comes to standardized tests such as SAT. This isn't true. Correlation isn't causation. You can't use your wealth to buy SAT scores. The best SAT tutoring available is Khan Academy, and it is free.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#166

Post by flangola7 »

djbusby wrote: post #156
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point is you can't just give preference based on income as its incredibly easy to fudge. Okay, well this is the US. Your tax returns are a very good indication of how much money you make. If you lie on your tax returns then you have much bigger issues than college admissions counselors.

If your family has $10MM in the bank, you too can take (and report) to IRS zero income.

In the US parents' income is already considered when applying for financial aid. Just add that info to admissions

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#167

Post by sandworm101 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #20
sandworm101 wrote: post #5

Standardized tests remain the only criteria totally in the control of the student. You can study for them and objectively do better, become a better applicant. Everthing else is either circumstantial or based in the opinion of others, mostly highschool teachers. If i had to rely on my highschool teachers' opinion of me i would not have ever gone to university let alone have won scholarships. Standardized testing allo…

It’s the other way around. It helps to have some familiarity with the test, so test prep has some value, but some rich kids can’t test their way out of a paper bag. The one thing they could do is hire a ringer to take the test for them, otherwise it is a valuable form of downward mobility which presents a “barrier” to them hoarding opportunity from someone more able.

I had a law prof once correct a student: "If we all just tell lies then this entire system breaks down." People hiring ringers, telling lies during the examination process, is a problem. It it isn't a statement against the concept of examinations. The answer is to make it difficult to cheat (ID etc) and establish appropriate punishments to dissuade. The ability to cheat illustrates a flaw in the testing procedure, not any flaw in the actual test.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#168

Post by wernercd »

whack wrote: post #120

The following paragraphs were especially powerful: > The chattering class is using poor kids as pawns to eliminate standardized testing. Which helps their own kids. Rich kids who “don’t test well.” But they know how to strategically boost their GPAs, get recommendation letters from important people, stack their resumes with extracurriculars, and use the right slogans in their admissions essays. They have “polish.” >…

I bet "why not ban legacy" is answered with "legacy donations mean two things: No chance".

https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-why-elite-colleges-...

"To find out why elite colleges love legacies, two business school professors were granted access to 16 years of admissions data at one elite Northeastern college. The upshot: it’s in this school’s clear self-interest to take them. Alumni children who received offers matriculated at much higher rates, giving the school more certainty in their future enrollment numbers. And these loyal families with multi-generational ties to the college were far more likely to donate funds, money that the school needs, in part, to offer scholarships to others."

Colleges want to look good... but no chance in hell they'll give up consistent students of families who donate.

Cost effective? not when it'll cost them millions or billions in kick backs.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#169

Post by ryzvonusef »

zozbot234 wrote: post #53
ryzvonusef wrote: post #45

As an Asian person, I think it's a cultural thing. There is this old joke about how even if you are a one-in-a-million person, there are still 8000 of "you"s to choose from; how does one chose who to pick, if there aren't positions for all of them? So how do you make it "fair"? Since of the number of seats are limited, so imagine if the cut-off for the last seat is for someone who is in the 90.3765335th percentile, l…

> You simply CAN'T provide the same resource to all of them, some of them will have to vie for a lower-ranked resource. It depends what the "resource" is. If it's the mix of prestige and the individualized attention of highly impressive scholars that you get at elite colleges, then of course not. If it's simply high-quality educational content plus some average-quality tutoring, that's a scalable resource that could…

I get the gist of your comment, but isn't prestige kind of the point (at least partially)?

If education was the point, you don't even need to spend money for cheap local community colleges, you can get a very good education from MOOCs like Coursera (I am doing one right now, in fact), edX, heck youtube even.

But the whole point is that an organization is staking their prestige against your qualification. There wouldn't be a barrier to entry in the first place for the MOOCs, so the point wouldn't even arise.

----

I know the HN commenter base prides itself of favoring "experience" over "qualifications", but let's be honest here.

When they are both starting from fresh, a "traditionally qualified" person would have access to more opportunities, because the barriers are lower, which is what parents are aiming for, and the more prestigious the qualifying authority, the lower the barrier.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#170

Post by photonbucket »

jakeinspace wrote: post #145
_mh56 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in India, we have quotas for different kinds of people. There's caste based, Gender based and finally EWS (Economically Weaker Section) Quota. Overall 60% of total seats are reserved for these people. My friend who's ultra rich was selected in EWS Quota. His father who runs his own company took Zero pay for the last two years so he qualified for the benefits. Meanwhile people who actually deserved this had to co…

This is off topic, but do you find it difficult seeing this friend the same way while knowing that they and their father gamed the system like that? If I learned this about somebody I knew it would seriously hurt their image in my eyes.

People will do what they can to make their children's lives better. It just means the system was poorly designed
Post reply on HN