Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It • Hacker News Board

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#31

Post by smm2000 » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 6:42 AM UTC

nemothekid wrote: post #24

Spooky23 wrote: post #21

Colleges are attempting to deal with claims of racial bias by watering down their standards. The bias claims are there because disadvantaged groups are well... Disadvantaged. They have a shitty education in primary school that poisons the well for them. Why should character or "heart" matter? What if you're a smart kid who is a real asshole? Or a dumb kid with a good sales pitch? Or you didn't participate in extra-ci…

For elite schools atleast, I don't think it has anything to do with watering down their standards. These schools have the pick of the crop and if 3.3million high school students graduate in the US alone every year, the top 1% of students make up about 33,000 applicants, far more than the 2000 or so Harvard admitted in last year. The issue really morphs from "How do I select the best students for my school?" to "What…

The pool of qualified applicants is not as deep as you think. I am doing a lot of college recruiting interviews and students at Harvard, MIT, Berkley are pretty good but the quality goes down very quickly after top 10. We consistently make offers to ~50% of students from MIT but only to 10%-15% of students from top 20-30 university.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#32

Post by simula67 » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 8:05 AM UTC

cabinpark wrote: post #26

colechristensen wrote: post #4

Maybe it isn't quite time for this question to be asked, but I'm damn well sure that the day is soon. Why are students being admitted into undergraduate programs any more? There are no admissions for the Khan Academy, and a huge chunk of undergraduate college education could be done in exactly that format. Donate to have units created very well (and a few different versions just because) copyleft. Pay Universities fo…

While I can understand that for basic stuff, there is no way I would ever attend an online course on some advanced undergraduate topics in physics or mathematics online. There is a benefit of being in a classroom environment when learning an advanced subject. You have a direct connection to the professor and other students, which is essential for advanced material. Plus you can easily go and talk to them afterwards f…

It would be hard to do online courses for subjects that require a lot of physical tools for teaching, or loads of physical activity. Some examples are physics, mechanical engineering, computer hardware design, dancing etc.

But it might be useful promote online education more since it increases accessibility and affordability.

> You have a direct connection to the professor and other students, which is essential for advanced material.

You can ask the student to write down their questions and mail the professor. This way, a good professor can be shared by many more students.

>How would undergraduates get exposed to research in your system?

The professors can guide them to where interesting conversation happens on the Internet, and they can get exposed to interesting research there.

>I forgot to mention the university environment. Being surrounded by my peers in the same field really helped.

There is no law that this atmosphere of dense population of smart people should be limited to universities.

By the way, I am agreeing to your central point, which is that online education should be a complement and not a substitute to conventional education.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#33

Post by james1071 » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 9:25 AM UTC

I have said this before, but the admissions system at so many US colleges looks very strange to British eyes.

There is special treatment for people who play sport, whose parents went to the same college (especially if they give money) and for those who have the right sort of hobbies.

If that was not bad enough, there are different rules for different ethnic groups.

It really is quite extraordinary.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#34

Post by barry-cotter » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 10:00 AM UTC

spamizbad wrote: post #25

xname wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When people say a test has a socioeconomic bias, they're saying a question can become easier or harder depending on a student's economic background. That's not their argument. However, actually the issue you mentioned has long been noticed by psychologists / test makers. Experts in SAT / ACT know a lot about these things. Please refer to Differential Item Functioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_item_…

> Experts in SAT / ACT know a lot about these things. Experts at ACT maybe. But didn't the SAT recently announce it's re-tooling much of its test to address these issues?

The new changes haven't been tested at all from what I've read. They're dropping vocabulary tests, for example, which are astonishingly predictive. From the media coverage it doesn't look like the College Board are as interested in scholastic aptitude as plaudits for Doing the Right Thing™.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#35

Post by Spooky23 » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 1:18 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #29

Spooky23 wrote: post #21

Colleges are attempting to deal with claims of racial bias by watering down their standards. The bias claims are there because disadvantaged groups are well... Disadvantaged. They have a shitty education in primary school that poisons the well for them. Why should character or "heart" matter? What if you're a smart kid who is a real asshole? Or a dumb kid with a good sales pitch? Or you didn't participate in extra-ci…

> If you can't read and get into Harvard, you'll wash out quickly. A college does a disservice to students to admit them when they will wash out. My experience as a student at Caltech in the 70's was they did a pretty good job with the admissions. They selected for smart & motivated & interested in tech. As a result, living in the dorms full of this kind of people, there was never a dull moment. I only knew a couple…

They are doing that now to disadvantaged students. An acquaintance in my state university was a smart guy from a notoriously awful high school.

He was completely overwhelmed and dropped out his first year -- he just wasn't prepared for the material, and the remedial help offered by the college wasn't very useful to someone who wanted to be in a STEM track. He dropped out, joined the Army, and flourished... we're Facebook friends, and he has an MS in CS now.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#36

Post by hawkharris » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 2:32 PM UTC

adamnemecek wrote: post #6

hawkharris wrote: post #2

I've always been fascinated by the philosophical divide among the nations with the best educational systems. Some (i.e. Finland) deemphasize tests, while others such as India and South Korea place strong emphasis on them. The issue is not black and white enough for us to categorically embrace or condemn tests. Different cultural and environmental factors are obviously in play.

Idk if the Indian educational system is considered the best (I'm actually pretty sure that it's not). As for the South Korean educational system, idk if it should be considered a model to follow considering kids there spend like 16 hours a day in school but perform comparatively well as kids in Finland who spend maybe less than half of that time in school.

Idk if the Indian educational system is considered the best (I'm actually pretty sure that it's not).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Institutes_of_Technology

As for the South Korean educational system, idk if it should be considered a model to follow considering kids there spend like 16 hours a day in school but perform comparatively well as kids in Finland who spend maybe less than half of that time in school.

The point is that the children who learn through standardized tests are performing just as well as, if not better than, those in an environment where tests are deemphasized.

Having said that, it's hard to make the cross-cultural argument that standardized testing is always positive or negative.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#37

Post by snowwrestler » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 3:00 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #21

Colleges are attempting to deal with claims of racial bias by watering down their standards. The bias claims are there because disadvantaged groups are well... Disadvantaged. They have a shitty education in primary school that poisons the well for them. Why should character or "heart" matter? What if you're a smart kid who is a real asshole? Or a dumb kid with a good sales pitch? Or you didn't participate in extra-ci…

The question is whether higher education should perpetuate pre-existing socio-economic disparities, or seek to compensate or overcome them. The vast majority of educators believe in the latter.

Thus they need to see beyond the present circumstances of each applicant and discern which will be most likely to excel, taking into account the impact of their 4-year educational process.

Some students from great backgrounds will fail to keep up in college. While some others who come from disadvantaged backgrounds are able to "catch up" and pass others in achievement by the end of college.

How can they predict those outcomes in advance? That's the question that the SAT and ACT were created to answer, and now we're finding that they don't actually answer it better than alternatives. In part because it is becoming clear that there is more to success in life than how well a person solves word problems.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#38

Post by gdwatson » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 8:37 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #37

Spooky23 wrote: post #21

Colleges are attempting to deal with claims of racial bias by watering down their standards. The bias claims are there because disadvantaged groups are well... Disadvantaged. They have a shitty education in primary school that poisons the well for them. Why should character or "heart" matter? What if you're a smart kid who is a real asshole? Or a dumb kid with a good sales pitch? Or you didn't participate in extra-ci…

The question is whether higher education should perpetuate pre-existing socio-economic disparities, or seek to compensate or overcome them. The vast majority of educators believe in the latter. Thus they need to see beyond the present circumstances of each applicant and discern which will be most likely to excel, taking into account the impact of their 4-year educational process. Some students from great backgrounds…

Can you provide more background on your statement that the SAT and ACT are not achieving the goals for which they were designed? My suspicion has been that things are changing because aptitude tests are unpopular for socio-political reasons rather than for any want of predictive power.

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#39

Post by analog31 » Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 10:37 PM UTC

crystalmace wrote: post #27

analog31 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt that I would have survived an online education, though I can't say for sure. I know someone who got most of an undergrad degree online, in a substantive field, by necessity -- she was a teenage mom working a job and caring for an infant in a rural town. Her mom told me the hardest things about online college for her daughter were the loneliness and crushing boredom. It's great that she had that opportunity. I…

Are you implying that online courses are less 'educational'? I ask because you placed educated person in quotes.

Not at all. I was just identifying "educated person" as a term in potential need of a definition. Thanks!

Re: Colleges Want Students with Character, But Can’t Measure It

#40

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Apr 24, 2014, 1:59 AM UTC

gdwatson wrote: post #38

snowwrestler wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is whether higher education should perpetuate pre-existing socio-economic disparities, or seek to compensate or overcome them. The vast majority of educators believe in the latter. Thus they need to see beyond the present circumstances of each applicant and discern which will be most likely to excel, taking into account the impact of their 4-year educational process. Some students from great backgrounds…

Can you provide more background on your statement that the SAT and ACT are not achieving the goals for which they were designed? My suspicion has been that things are changing because aptitude tests are unpopular for socio-political reasons rather than for any want of predictive power.

Basically, the tests were supposed to provide an objective means to predict student outcomes. But they are no better predictors than high school grades alone. And the scoring shows significant correlations with factors like gender, race, language, family income, etc.--so they're not objective.

From this article:

> The University of California, Berkeley1 economist Jesse M. Rothstein has found that the combination of a student’s high school grades and demographic information predicted first-year grades in college about as well as her high school grades and SAT scores do.

> DePaul is implementing their own tests for non-cognitive skills, with a series of essay questions. For the entering class of 2012, about 10 percent of applicants (or about 5 percent of the freshman class) chose not to send ACT or SAT scores. Instead they completed four short-answer questions, designed to measure their leadership skills and their ability to meet long-term goals. Systematically scoring the responses to those questions, DePaul reported that the freshman-to-sophomore retention rate was almost identical for those who submitted standardized test scores (85 percent) and those who did not (84 percent).