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

Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

mitadmissions.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#341

Post by [deleted] »

caffeine wrote: post #209
rg111 wrote: post #130

> as a result, not having SATs/ACT scores to consider tends to raise socioeconomic barriers to demonstrating readiness for our education It all come down to me to what this point touches. When you have a test, you have something definite to prepare for. Even if you do not have dedicated mentors or well-wishing, caring teachers, you simply know there is a test that significantly improves your chances for MIT. When you…

The no-test policy is espoused by two groups who find themselves to be unlikely allies: naive progressives and actual racists. The naive progressives think what you’d expect: “Minorities and poor people can’t possibly be expected to do well on anything objective, so it’s unfair to test them”. It is bigotry, but at least it’s well-meaning. The actual racists are more cynical: “I don’t want Yale to be 67% Asian.” Obvio…

[deleted]

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#342

Post by tonymet »

0x20cowboy wrote: post #336

I grew up poor, and from my anecdotal experience people do better on the SAT if they "are rich". You can also pay people to take the test for you. Maybe it's because they don't have to spend their days worry about getting shot, stabbed or beaten to the ground by gangs. Maybe it's because they get to eat every day. I guess, perhaps, they get more quality study time. Or, heck maybe you're all right, random questions -…

i grew up poor and SAT helped me escape poverty. are we forced to only accept negative outcomes when sharing experiences ?

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#343

Post by adam_arthur »

0x20cowboy wrote: post #336

I grew up poor, and from my anecdotal experience people do better on the SAT if they "are rich". You can also pay people to take the test for you. Maybe it's because they don't have to spend their days worry about getting shot, stabbed or beaten to the ground by gangs. Maybe it's because they get to eat every day. I guess, perhaps, they get more quality study time. Or, heck maybe you're all right, random questions -…

I do think the standard leetcode style interviews are often administered poorly.

But I also think that if you create a fairly complex mousetrap, the profile of the average person who gets to the other side will be decent enough.

So likely many false negatives, but works at scale.

I'd do it very differently for my own company. But I think some of the bigger cos have actually gotten better, e.g. not asking certain types of questions too far removed from 99% of programming work.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#344

Post by namdnay »

0x20cowboy wrote: post #336

I grew up poor, and from my anecdotal experience people do better on the SAT if they "are rich". You can also pay people to take the test for you. Maybe it's because they don't have to spend their days worry about getting shot, stabbed or beaten to the ground by gangs. Maybe it's because they get to eat every day. I guess, perhaps, they get more quality study time. Or, heck maybe you're all right, random questions -…

I think you’re focusing your anger on the wrong target. Is it Google’s fault for performing blind objective skill tests? Or is it your society’s fault for not giving you the chance to grow up fed and safe enough to study?

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#345

Post by rossdavidh »

hkt wrote: post #172
deanCommie wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Latin in the 19th century was always still useful to one's education, Was it? Or was it perpetuated by a community that happened to already know it and so they leveraged it?

I suspect the answer is "both".

Bingo.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#346

Post by aliston »

cm2012 wrote: post #145
visarga wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And rich people have the luxury of more time to study Those rich students, they cheat by studying harder! Btw, I don't actually think being rich correlates with better academic achievements. It's better to be in the middle, not rich, not poor. To keep motivated.

Nah, there is a straight linear correlation between parental income and sat score. https://static01.nyt.com/images/2009/08/27/business/economy/...

Did you bother to read the letter? This is directly addressed:

"This may seem like a counterintuitive claim to some, given the widespread understanding that performance on the SAT/ACT is correlated with socioeconomic status. Research indeed shows some correlation, but unfortunately, research also shows correlations hold for just about every other factor admissions officers can consider, including essays, grades, access to advanced coursework (as well as opportunities to actually take notionally available coursework), and letters of recommendations, among others. Meanwhile, research has shown widespread testing can identify subaltern students who would be missed by these other measures."

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#347

Post by lucidbee »

I was a crappy student in HS and the only good thing about me was my SAT scores. They got me into a good school. I ended up as a highly ranked engineer at Microsoft. My heart sank when people started not using the SAT. I hope this becomes a trend.

I have also read that it is really really hard to show that tutoring pays off for the SAT. I think the SAT is the fairest part of the admissions package.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#348

Post by adamsmith143 »

londons_explore wrote: post #277
uwuemu wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue exactly otherwise... with the advent of the web platform and frameworks like .net, the vast majority (and I mean like 95%) of developers will never touch anything ML related in their careers. I mean, I get that this is MIT and many of their students will end up working with ML, but applying that globally to CS is nonsense. Back when I was studying CS (cze) more than a decade ago, we had to pass linear a…

If you just want to be a great web developer, MIT may not be the best place for you. MIT best prepares people for those less well defined roles, such as designing the next era of web browsers . For that, you can never know exactly which skills will be needed, so it's probably best to have as many neighbouring skills as possible so you don't hit problems you can't solve merely because the knowledge required to see the…

Of course if I browse linkedin MIT EECS grads, most are probably just doing bug fixing at FAANG or the latest unicorn and some small fraction are doing anything revolutionary. It's also likely that they would have done so without an MIT education. See e.g the Collison brothers.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#350

Post by ceeplusplus »

0x20cowboy wrote: post #336

I grew up poor, and from my anecdotal experience people do better on the SAT if they "are rich". You can also pay people to take the test for you. Maybe it's because they don't have to spend their days worry about getting shot, stabbed or beaten to the ground by gangs. Maybe it's because they get to eat every day. I guess, perhaps, they get more quality study time. Or, heck maybe you're all right, random questions -…

I grew up poor enough that I got a full need-based ride to a state school. The SAT helped me differentiate myself from all the kids with expensive summer camps, tutoring for competitions, and expensive sports lessons that didn't actually do that well in school.

> Google style hiring process

A couple leetcode questions is hardly a difficult task compared to getting matched for residency as a doctor or accruing enough volunteering experience as a poor college kid for law school. Don't even get me started on investment banking.

Sorry that reality has hit you I guess? My perspective has always been that if you fail you should get up, evaluate what went wrong, and try again.

> but I was rejected everywhere I applied

Did you try going to community college and transferring?

Post reply on HN