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

371–380 of 393 posts

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#371

Post by bsder »

dehrmann wrote: post #224
bsder wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, you can improve your SAT score by studying somewhat, but not massively. This is completely mistaken. Just taking a couple sample exams will net you almost 100 points as you don't waste time figuring out how to take the test . Simple prep will net you 200+ points right off the top. For example, generating a correct answer is almost always way slower on these kinds of tests than quickly removing wrong answers. K…

> Just taking a couple sample exams will net you almost 100 points as you don't waste time figuring out how to take the test. You don't go in cold for the SAT. They give you enough free practice resources that anyone serious about taking the test should get those 100 points. Maybe to a practice test every weekend for a month leading up to the test. It's the tutoring where you have to invest a lot more time and money…

> You don't go in cold for the SAT.

A lot of people do.

The mere idea that test taking is a skill which can be honed like any other is an upper middle class social marker. In the case of the SAT, striking out wrong answers is FAR faster than generating correct ones unless your are really good. That's a test taking skill.

My parents were both school teachers and even they didn't know all that much about the SAT--they knew what it was and made sure I ran some practice tests. My guidance counseler (normally a totally useless position at most schools), however, was an old dude who was used to the fact that children of steelworkers had no clue how to prep for college.

He pulled my parents (and others) aside in 9th grade (almost 2 YEARS before you take the SAT for real) and said: "Here is the schedule of tests (PSAT, SAT), etc. and the order in which your child needs to take them. Note that the scholarship score is TWO TIMES THE VERBAL plus the math. Here are the sample test resources your child needs. Here is the vocabulary resource your child needs--that defines your scholarship chances. Your child needs to drill math to not make stupid mistakes. Complete these at an even rate for the next couple years and your child will qualify for most scholarships and have no issue getting admitted to any college below Ivy level. If you really want to go to an Ivy, you need the scores, but we'll need to find you an alumnus to advocate for you in order to boost your chances."

That man created a LOT of first and second generation college graduates.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#372

Post by bsder »

csa wrote: post #287
bsder wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, you can improve your SAT score by studying somewhat, but not massively. This is completely mistaken. Just taking a couple sample exams will net you almost 100 points as you don't waste time figuring out how to take the test . Simple prep will net you 200+ points right off the top. For example, generating a correct answer is almost always way slower on these kinds of tests than quickly removing wrong answers. K…

I am not sure why you are being downvoted (I upvoted you), but your statement is largely correct. 1. 50 points per section (M/V) just for being familiar with the test is common for folks in the middle range of scores — say 400-600 per section. The improvements are less at the extremes. 2. Very basic test taking strategies are worth another 20-30 per section for pretty much everyone. 3. Actually study/review of target…

> I am not sure why you are being downvoted (I upvoted you), but your statement is largely correct.

I don't know either, but there is something going on that seems to be time sensitive. Comments that hit quickly after posting sometimes receive significant downvoting while the same comments a couple hours later get significant upvoting.

Something is going on. I just don't know how people benefit from it. Are they trying to create a "history" ahead of the election cycles to whitewash their reputation or something?

I really wish that upvote and downvotes had your username tied to them in a visible way. I couldn't care less if random noname downvotes me if someone important upvotes. And, if someone I respect downvotes me, that's going to certainly get me to think a bit harder.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#373

Post by gen3 »

Budabellly wrote: post #364
gen3 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t see how that makes anything more fair? Some people are just bad test takers. What good does it make to penalize them for studying and trying to do the best they can do? Someone with a learning difference would be at a disadvantage. Also, why wouldn’t I just lie?

I was thinking less about penalization or individual application decisions, and more about aggregate or anonymized datasets for institutions and governing bodies (College Board, Common App, etc.) to inform their policies. And yeah, you could certainly lie, but I feel that's true for a lot of fields on college apps? Perhaps it could be reasonable to have your school validate or sponsor the answer? It's well researched…

That’s a good point. Having those numbers would be interesting, and hopefully help us employ better use of funding.

Having an anonymous survey portion that you ripped off from the main test and is collected separately could be beneficial, I think. I would want to also ask questions about their parents backgrounds, if they had a connection with a teacher in high school, internet access, and general questions about social media usage.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#374

Post by zamfi »

mennis16 wrote: post #252
zamfi wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The relevant question is, do SAT scores correlate with wealth more or less than whatever [...] Well, no, because the SAT correlates with wealth while plausibly having claim on being an objective measure. When little Johnny gets an internship as his daddy's company, that obviously correlates with wealth, and admissions committees can discount it. When little Susie is on a groundbreaking paper from mommy's lab, that…

I think you're overstating how easy it is to discount for wealth in those other scenarios. At least when it comes to high school research experience, it has rarely been the case IME that a student got such a position directly because of their family, and certainly it is very rare that a student explicitly works in a parent's lab. Yes, some private high schools feed to quality summer research programs, but A) those sc…

> I watched a lot of students that to be honest were just average get into very good schools

"Average" on what criteria?

I think I was unclear about research experience and similar -- it's not that having these experiences is a marker of wealth, it's that if the experience was only enabled by wealth, then it's more visible. If you're in mommy's lab -- what wealth without talent can get you -- it's clearer than if you got a tutor for the SAT. But perhaps I'm wrong on this.

You also raise a good point -- I don't think schools want to discount for wealth. I think they want to have interesting and capable people. Wealth makes many, if not most, people more interesting and capable. Why discount for that?

They want to avoid uninteresting, incapable students who appear interesting and capable because of wealth -- but there's no issue with admitting interesting, capable students who could take advantage of their own (parents') wealth to become more interesting and more capable!

Elite schools have long used the SAT/ACT as a "shouldn't score below XYZ" indicator for middle class students, and as a way to propel underrepresented students.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#375

Post by zamfi »

solveit wrote: post #286
mennis16 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're overstating how easy it is to discount for wealth in those other scenarios. At least when it comes to high school research experience, it has rarely been the case IME that a student got such a position directly because of their family, and certainly it is very rare that a student explicitly works in a parent's lab. Yes, some private high schools feed to quality summer research programs, but A) those sc…

I agree with everything you said and would like to add that I suspect > I think SAT/ACT are bad indicators for the "elite" schools because they just saturate this is a feature. Elite schools don't want to be able to tell the 0.5% from the 5%, because then they wouldn't be able to select for rich and solidly but not amazingly competent kids. They'll take the 0.01% olympiad medalists to fill their genius quota, then fi…

MIT explicitly transitioned in this way with former admissions director Marilee Jones, who moved away from "just admit the geniuses" to "let's get some of the well-rounded kids too".

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#376

Post by zamfi »

tsimionescu wrote: post #333
zamfi wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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'm sure SAT scores correlate with wealth, but the more important question is if they correlate with knowledge. In the end, there isn't any point in admitting a student to a university where they don't understand the curriculum. So the important question that I expect universities to ask themselves is: are we getting enough information about how well a student is going to be prepared for our curriculum based on their…

> If rich people who know less have higher SAT scores than poor people who know more

This considers only academic knowledge, and specifically only that knowledge that can be assessed in a standardized way.

Such knowledge makes up a very small fraction of success -- though you could make the argument that students' ability to acquire and demonstrate it probably correlates with success much more than the knowledge itself.

Second, why would you want to go to college with a bunch of other kids who just meet some bar on some measure of academic capability? At least in the US, college is most kids' first experience living away from home for an extended period of time. Wouldn't you want to be with driven individuals, interesting conversationalists, performers, intellectual peers across other disciplines, etc.?

Why limit admissions to "book smarts"? Why is that the most fair?

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#377

Post by jariel »

dominostars wrote: post #292
jariel wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably true, and really it hurts. In this Trumpian era we like to talk about the 'integrity of institutions' and yet so many are boldly willing to do away with the results of baseline objectivity when it doesn't suit their agenda. Because of course, the 'agenda' is what matters, not Truth or Objectivity. Hmmm ... I wonder if we could have a place, where like ... 'free thinkers' could be free to talk about i…

> In this Trumpian era we like to talk about the 'integrity of institutions' and yet so many are boldly willing to do away with the results of baseline objectivity when it doesn't suit their agenda. Except that the SAT and ACT have been shown over and over again to not be objective, so calling it "baseline objectivity" misses the point entirely.

No, the SATs are by far the most objective criteria, to not realize this, is to miss the point entirely.

That 'rich kids to better' is a more nuanced thing, not a fundamental flaw, because, after all, that 'rich kids do better' at the SATs and everything else, means that they are actually first-order better candidates for the school.

It's only when you take into consideration the secondary objectives, that the flaws in SATs become evident.

Now, of secondary objectives such as 'economic and racial composition' become the 'primary objective' - then objectively academic exercises like the SAD, grades etc. become irrelevant.

There is the possibility that SAT's are actually a distraction, that and that there might be a better way of determining ability - most of the rest of the world does it somehow.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#378

Post by collegeburner »

jameslk wrote: post #365
collegeburner wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I hated taking SATs as much as anyone, and have an AP exam in a few hours, so I'm no standardized test fan. But there are reasons for it that obviously don't apply in the same ways when evaluating job applicants. While some objective comparison might be helpful, this is a massive apples-and-oranges issue. * College applicants have, by and large, no real-world experience that demonstrates their competency. There…

It's a shame this conversations always has to split into either of two camps: dogmatically for standardized testing or against it. It's almost as if there's no awareness that perhaps it could be beneficial to try both, perhaps where it's appropriate, and see what the outcome is. Just like not every company uses whiteboard interviews.

Oh don't get me wrong, I really hate standardized testing. It's been the bane of my existence for several years now. I waste time cramming stuff I learned years ago to prove to some pencil pusher that I do in fact know it (even though I've been working on much more advanced stuff since then). However, I also think using some of it as an objective bar to meet is a necessary evil, though not as a sole metric (I think the European model of "take one test to determine your life" is absolutely horrible, but that's what one gets in a planned economy.)

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#379

Post by andrewlgood »

throw872579 wrote: post #336
geomark wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There some people who assert that it is in fact the Finnish language that gives them an advantage in early schooling, that the language is much more regular and easier to learn that it gives school children something like a 2 year advantage over English learners. Not disagreeing with you at all. Just wanted to point out another facet of the debate.

A key advantage seems to be no private schools: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-am...

FYI, the article referenced while informative is from 2011. Finland performance on the PISA has dropped steadily since then. Article also does not discuss whether wealthier families hire tutors or other similar resources to assist their children.

Re: University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

#380

Post by ciarannolan »

gliese1337 wrote: post #366
ciarannolan wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the University of California system should primarily serve the people of California.

Maybe it should, but there is no indication that they have actually made a purposeful choice to go that route.

Except, you know, the news story we're commenting on.
Post reply on HN