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

251–260 of 684 posts

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#251

Post by bsdetector »

kenjackson wrote: post #126
tokey wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was incorrect about the 65% of Berkeley as Asian. It's 30.6%. Note this is double the percentage as the Ivy League schools - and it's based on a framework that was specifically developed as a way to get around the 1996 ban on affirmative action. I still believe the only explanation for eliminating clear, measurable and quantifiable metrics for university admissions is because universities are looking for discrete w…

I still don’t see how it’s discrimination against White students. This actually looks more like discrimination against Asians, with Whites being the biggest beneficiary of the discrimination based on the numbers. Blacks get the biggest bump, but it is Whites who “steal” the most spots. It does make me wonder about the marketing of anti-affirmative action. For example you see on social media the kids who posts about t…

> I still don’t see how it’s discrimination against White students. This actually looks more like discrimination against Asians, with Whites being the biggest beneficiary of the discrimination based on the numbers.

Because you are looking at it through the lens of total student makeup of certain top universities.

If Whites need 100 points higher on SAT than some others, then Whites are being discriminated against. That is, if you remove only the discrimination against Whites then they do better in the current system. If Asians need 200 points higher on SAT and you remove all discrimination then Whites do worse at some top universities than currently. So Whites would be both being discriminated against and for at those certain universities.

If you look at the overall college system, there's something like 35% of undergrads that are Black/Hispanic and 5% for Asian so in the overall system Whites net benefit more from no discrimination than Asians do.

So you've picked a particular point of view between principled and subjective, global and local, to conclude Whites aren't being discriminated against. Maybe it's worth exploring why.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#252

Post by tester756 »

wunderland wrote: post #27

All of this debate about what measures should be used to gatekeep higher education ignore that the US system is only loosely about teaching students; the goal of an American university degree is class differentiation. There is not a shortage of textbooks or qualified teachers who could explain calculus or history or economics. As a society, the could easily produce far more educated people (and for a lower cost), but…

>There is not a shortage of textbooks or qualified teachers who could explain calculus or history or economics.

There is shortage of skilled teachers, especially in CS.

People go to the industry cuz pay sucks.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#253

Post by pilarphosol »

notlukesky wrote: post #234
_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…

40% for meritocratic entrance is more than twice what is at elite schools in the US. Maybe ambitious Americans should move to India for a fairer chance. At most US elite schools, less than 20 percent is for “non-reserved” seats. Elite schools reserve seats for sports teams (affirmative action for rich white elites with “sports” like fencing and rowing), legacies (affirmative action for rich white elites), related to…

This is about right. They want every podunk town to remember that the smartest or most impressive kid in 10 years went (finishing is optional) and they don’t really want more “strivers” than that.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#254

Post by vasco »

pmoriarty wrote: post #211
tokey wrote: post #71

Isn't this patently obvious that dropping the SAT is entirely about creating pretext for continued discrimination against Asian applicants? In 1996, California repealed affirmative action via Prop 209. At the UC Berkeley and UCLA, considered the 'best' of the UC system, Asians represented 25-30% of the student base. Studies and fear-mongering at the time showed that a repeal of affirmative action would imply that Asi…

"any quantifiable, OBJECTIVE framework" The whole contention is that these measures are not objective, and that they're biased in favor of certain groups. You can't just base the core of your argument on the assumption of objectivity when that objectivity itself is what is in question.

Your argument makes no sense because as the comment you are replying says, when you drop the shenanigans, the universities get full of Asians. If what you say is true, they'd become full of rich people of any race, common denominator being the richest you are the likelier you are to be there. But instead what happens is hard working Asians are admitted.

Universities should optimize for the best students.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#255

Post by projektfu »

Is this coming from a different place by the sort of person who has good-but-but-top grades and top standardized test scores, but thinks they deserve a look by elite universities? However, they can't say that so they point to a theoretical disadvantaged student who is somehow elevated by taking the test?

Fundamentally, the question is whether the SAT does what ETS wants you to believe it does, that it provides an objective assessment of a high schooler for college admissions. The claim is a correlation to the first year grades. Beyond that, it's mainly correlated to IQ and social class (professional class scores best IIRC).

Contrast this with the situation in other countries that rely heavily on testing, such as Ireland. As I understand it, the subjects are tested and the test grade is used instead of subjective markers of academic performance. Students are allowed to choose their university course based on priority derived from these test scores. This seems like a much more likely way for a poor Irish kid to arrive at Trinity college than for Harvard to notice and pluck out a poor American kid, if they even bothered applying.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#256

Post by tester756 »

I've been thinking about this for long time

On one hand I'm fan of standardized exams because they feel very very fair, are transparent and allow you to bootstrap yourself.

On the other hand I see the pros of taking people's traits into consideration because you know, it's not always that the top scorers are actually top people.

Unfortunately how to decide which traits are desirable? who decides that? etc etc.

And just because of that I'd default to first option - pure exams, because they're fair and transparent, rules are clear - just be the best.

But I do agree that in some cases there may be better ways to pick top people - just like during job interview.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#258

Post by JohnDoe_f9t40e »

commandlinefan wrote: post #148
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.” >…

> If equity is so important Because equity is about keeping people down, not lifting people up.

100% correct

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#259

Post by Spooky23 »

bradleyjg wrote: post #241
Spooky23 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that the standardized tests correlate with IQ, and IQ has been determined to be have racial and other biases. I went to a shitty rural high school - high scores on my ACT made a huge difference as anyone who could read got out of that school with a 3.7.

What I’m saying is that isn’t “the issue,” it’s just pretext. Schools can do affirmative action for African Americans without making standardized testing optional, they have been for decades. What’s harder for them to do without getting rid of such tests is discriminating against Asians (and middle class whites) in favor of rich whites. It’s no coincidence that this is happening in the wake of the Harvard lawsuit. Wh…

Affirmative action is a big bugaboo that will probably be subject of a Supreme Court action.

I think these are complex issues and there’s no scenario where everyone is happy. As a society we’d be better off to tone down the fawning over Ivy League schools.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#260

Post by slibhb »

pmoriarty wrote: post #211
tokey wrote: post #71

Isn't this patently obvious that dropping the SAT is entirely about creating pretext for continued discrimination against Asian applicants? In 1996, California repealed affirmative action via Prop 209. At the UC Berkeley and UCLA, considered the 'best' of the UC system, Asians represented 25-30% of the student base. Studies and fear-mongering at the time showed that a repeal of affirmative action would imply that Asi…

"any quantifiable, OBJECTIVE framework" The whole contention is that these measures are not objective, and that they're biased in favor of certain groups. You can't just base the core of your argument on the assumption of objectivity when that objectivity itself is what is in question.

If your a priori belief is that every group (however defined) has the same merit then every measure of merit is biased except 1. a coin flip 2. some form of group quotas.

Standardized tests are the least-bad way to measure merit. We should try to make them better, not get rid of them.

Post reply on HN