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

University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 393 posts

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#181

Post by SiempreViernes »

rvp-x wrote: post #162
zajio1am wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here the common strategy for STEM degree programmes is to admit most people and then make first year hard enough that e.g. 2/3 of students are eliminated. In some sense it is more fair than strict admission criteria.

I can see a future cynical me talking about how brutal it is to lure poor students and have them take loans to pay first year tuition only to kick them out a year later with nothing to show for it, if they're not the top 1/3 for some reason.

This is in the context of a free education system, the only thing the poor students loose is a bit of time.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#182

Post by ciarannolan »

hpoe wrote: post #3

I know some people protest measures that are considered more "objective" over measures that are more "holistic", whether this is in school admittance, performance evaluation, promotion consideration, interviewing, determining welfare benefits, choosing who makes the rules and governs. However it has been my experience that whenever an explicit test or hierarchy is removed another shadow one builds up that is more sub…

>However it has been my experience that whenever an explicit test or hierarchy is removed another shadow one builds up that is more subjective, more biased, and more subject to abuse.

I think it's naive to assume that this is an accident.

This is _exactly_ the reason to make admissions more subjective: to give a small group of people carte blanche to pick and choose candidates based on race, origin, etc.

This way the annoying statistics about affirmative action that look plainly racist just... disappear.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#183

Post by orwin »

rvp-x wrote: post #162
zajio1am wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here the common strategy for STEM degree programmes is to admit most people and then make first year hard enough that e.g. 2/3 of students are eliminated. In some sense it is more fair than strict admission criteria.

I can see a future cynical me talking about how brutal it is to lure poor students and have them take loans to pay first year tuition only to kick them out a year later with nothing to show for it, if they're not the top 1/3 for some reason.

not grandparent, but where i live it's the same system: ten years ago tuition were 230€/year until your master degree, roughly half got cut after the first year and a fifth/quarter the second year.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#184

Post by orwin »

nerfhammer wrote: post #177
zajio1am wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here the common strategy for STEM degree programmes is to admit most people and then make first year hard enough that e.g. 2/3 of students are eliminated. In some sense it is more fair than strict admission criteria.

rather than accepting them for an entire year and then kicking 2/3rds of them out, why not don't kick them out and just teach three times as many students. feels more humane somehow

If you're not making into year 2 (or year 3), you can repeat ad vitam aeternam.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#185

Post by ciarannolan »

remarkEon wrote: post #33

That sound you hear is panicked elites, rushing to the "side door" of the UC system in an attempt to figure out how best to influence their kid's probability of admission since paying a few grand for prep sessions (for piece of mind, mostly) on what's a pretty darn good measure of academic aptitude is a waste of everyone's time, now that the test is rendered meaningless ... until California develops their own. I'm su…

>That sound you hear is panicked elites, rushing to the "side door" of the UC system [...]

Are you sure? Because I think the "elites" or very wealthy will be perfectly fine with removing objectivity. In fact, it helps them.

This hurts working class and poor applicants who don't fit the, shall we say, "background" that admissions offices of elite universities are looking for in 2020.

As time goes on I have less and less respect for credentials from elite institutions because of this.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#186

Post by null0pointer »

albntomat0 wrote: post #172
null0pointer wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with the SAT, so I might be misunderstanding. But how is returning to an earlier section of the paper after you've completed a later section considered cheating? In all the exams I took over high school/university we could complete the paper in any order we like.

The SAT is divided into sections, with a time limit for each one. If I recall correctly, each one is 10 - 30 minutes, with multiple sections making up reading, writing and math. The test is also designed with time pressure in mind.

Ah I see, thanks for explaining.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#187

Post by [deleted] »

jwilber wrote: post #128

UC Berkeley alumni here. Don’t know that this is a good thing. Currently, the UC’s provide a lot of weight to holistic applications. These often favor privileged kids, as they have access to far more opportunities than others. For some, the SAT provided a sort of leveling field in that regard. Still, it wasn’t perfect, but I fail to see how what they come up with will fix the issue. Of interest is that all of this is…

[deleted]

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#188

Post by thereare5lights »

zamfi wrote: post #117
applecrazy wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is likely a way to reduce asian american attendance at the top UC schools This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the Times article about this yesterday. I also applied to college last year, so I have a pretty recent knowledge of the process. I spent a grand total of $28 and managed to get a 99th percentile score on the SAT. To claim it’s impossible to score high on that test without money is absolutel…

> I spent a grand total of $28 and managed to get a 99th percentile score on the SAT. To claim it’s impossible to score high on that test without money is absolutely false. No one is claiming it's "impossible", and I don't want to minimize your experience -- 20 years ago, I also scored 99th percentile on the SAT with only $15 spent on practice books -- but it's absolutely not the norm. The reality is that a SAT score…

I don't really have a point, just going to add in my experience and some thoughts.

I came from a lower middle class background, not white if that matters, did next to zero studying, paid nothing to prepare and got a 96th percentile score. The extent of the preparation I did was practice tests held at my high school.

However, I didn't come from the background you described: living in poverty, unable to afford basic needs, parents or guardians infrequently present, with unsteady income.

I had a roof over my head, never worried about where my next meal was coming from. The only thing I'd might have in common with people of that background is that my parents didn't graduate elementary school, parents were paid less than min wage under the table, and that I grew up on welfare.

That's my background. From where I stand I'm skeptical that tutoring really skews the results to the extent that wealth is primary thing measured by the SATs. I had no tutoring and only relied on the education I received from public schools. That said, the quality of public schools still correlated with wealth. But school quality being linked to wealth is a much bigger problem than standardized testing. And it doesn't change, ultimately, how much education the test taking has absorbed from school. Removing the SATs as a requirement may or may not make things better. But doing it and claiming that you're making things better for those that are less fortunate seems like a stretch when the root cause is that they're receiving a poorer education in the first place given that if you fixed that, this problem of standardized testing would benefit the rich to a much lesser extent.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#189

Post by caseysoftware »

anon102010 wrote: post #48
remarkEon wrote: post #33

That sound you hear is panicked elites, rushing to the "side door" of the UC system in an attempt to figure out how best to influence their kid's probability of admission since paying a few grand for prep sessions (for piece of mind, mostly) on what's a pretty darn good measure of academic aptitude is a waste of everyone's time, now that the test is rendered meaningless ... until California develops their own. I'm su…

Haha.. I think you have this backwards! If you think money can buy a good SAT score - go make some. Reality? Much easier to pay for a trip to "volunteer" in africa or at the local hospital, get on sports teams etc etc. If you have $$ being head of club X is a cakewalk! I had life changing SAT scores, and while prep helps, that slacker kid isn't getting 1600

A few years ago, I was advising a group of undergraduates at a university and noticed that one was the President of their club. I thought that was cool and met another.. who was also President. Then a third.

It turns out, they called all their members "president" so they could all declare they were a "president of X" on their resume and could talk about leadership. Creative way to game the system for $0.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#190

Post by dragonwriter »

hpoe wrote: post #3

I know some people protest measures that are considered more "objective" over measures that are more "holistic", whether this is in school admittance, performance evaluation, promotion consideration, interviewing, determining welfare benefits, choosing who makes the rules and governs. However it has been my experience that whenever an explicit test or hierarchy is removed another shadow one builds up that is more sub…

> I know some people protest measures that are considered more "objective" over measures that are more "holistic",

I don't think anyone does that; “objective” and “holistic” are on orthogonal axes. The opposite of “holistic” is “narrow” and of “objective” is “subjective”.

You can have narrow or holistic subjective criteria, and narrow or holistic objective criteria.

> Sure the SAT/ACT does favor students whose parents had enough money to afford private tutors,

Well it favors students for whom the cost (both financial and opportunity) of taking it multiple times isn't an issue, even if tutoring isn't a factor.

Post reply on HN