Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief • Hacker News Board

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#371

Post by MichaelNolan » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:17 PM UTC

civilized wrote: post #97

kenjackson wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. And I’m going to be coy and not tell you much about it. So you’re right to be skeptical. In a few years I’ll speak more freely on it.

Skeptical is putting it mildly. I'd give you better chances of having a secret proof of the Riemann Hypothesis than producing miracle educational results at scale (even if it is just on a standardized test).

They are being so vague that’s it’s impossible for us to know, but they didn’t say “at scale”. You’re certainly correct that there isn’t some secret sauce that we could just apply to everyone. But it wouldn’t surprise me if there was a service that costs (high) 5 or 6 figures per year that could substantially increase test scores.

Though I would imagine such a service would have to take place over months/years and not days/weeks, and that kind of blurs the lines of whether it even counts as test prep at that point.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#372

Post by somethoughts » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:17 PM UTC

bnralt wrote: post #239

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.” >…

> This is a simple and effective way of achieving the goals they claim to be championing. And what are the real goals of these institutions? The whole approach of having artificially limited education where people are sifted into higher and lower status classes based upon judgements made when they're teenagers is premised on elitism, not equity. That's the purpose of these institutions - not to education as many peop…

To your point, the biggest issue that I see is that elite schools are not growing physically to accept more students. When the eliteness is built on exclusivity versus the quality of the education/graduates that pits admissions of legacy versus new admits.

Its kind of like when Nokia used to sell the mobile phones with gold plating and the only way to get one was via an invite from an influencer. Basically creating the perception of value via false scarcity.

The first elite university school system that can physically expand to multiple campuses to accommodate new in person students and provide them with the exact same quality education and opportunities to network with legacy students will become Apple of collegiate education.

IMHO, the UC school system gets probably closest to this ideal.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#373

Post by kodah » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:17 PM UTC

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.” >…

All of these takes ignore the fact that college shouldn't be a privilege. As long as we keep to the point that only a select few can go to college then we'll keep fighting over scraps. Nobody in this debate wants a meritocracy because implementing one would harm their interests.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#374

Post by lordnacho » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:20 PM UTC

Jensson wrote: post #338

lordnacho wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever met kids who aren't good at studying? Do you think they somehow get their shit together just for this one test, because they read somewhere that it's judged fairly and a great investment of time? Teenagers will somehow know that 20 hours, that's where Jensson's return curve breaks? People who study a lot study a lot for the SAT, people who study little study little for the SAT, and in between people do…

> Have you ever met kids who aren't good at studying? Do you think they somehow get their shit together just for this one test, because they read somewhere that it's judged fairly and a great investment of time? Teenagers will somehow know that 20 hours, that's where Jensson's return curve breaks? I was one of those kids. I never had a stable home, I have 5 siblings with many parents, I moved between different parent…

Yes, but do you think that's what normally happens? I would suggest that what normally happens in your situation is that no studying gets done and you bomb the test.

I also know people who've been in your situation, and that's what I see more often than not.

I can understand if you think that's what the SATs are for though, a kind of lifeline for kids in bad situations. I just have reservations about it actually working enough of the time to not simply be another opportunity hoarding play by wealthier people.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#375

Post by btilly » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:21 PM UTC

erikpukinskis wrote: post #347

tomp wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a general question for the whole "social justice" movement. If you're concerned about the wellbeing of black people, and you justify your concern with statistics pointing out that they're disproportionately poor, why not, instead of instituting preferential treatment for black people (which, btw, is racist), you support preferential treatment for poor people instead? That way, you are more efficient (e.g. you…

The basic hypotheses for the pro-affirmative action crowd are: 1) Black people are not actually less “good at stuff”, we just have a habit of defining “stuff” in a way that excludes the things that black people are more likely to excel at. And, 2) Where black people do statistically worse, it’s not due to any innate difference, it’s because socially accepted “normal” support systems are more useful for people with ch…

Sorry, but I take offense at this "it is all a matter of opinion and all opinions are equally valid" BS.

1) It is trivially true that if you define your measure right, you can make anyone succeed. For example black people are better at looking like black people. But we try to define "stuff" in a way that correlates with ability to do economically useful tasks. There are excellent reasons to do so.

2) You are ignoring the obvious fact that blacks do NOT get anything like equal treatment. They start with terrible schools, in neighborhoods that are aggressively targeted by police, and grow up with realistic expectations of going to jail that are amply born out by lived experiences. It takes willful blindness and stupidity to ignore that there are excellent reasons why we should expect poor black performance.

Given that the inferences on which this affirmative action position are based require willful blindness and stupidity to believe, there really is a giant logical flaw. It is most emphatically NOT plausible to say that we should expect equal performance from children whose fathers are in jail, whose schools are atrocious, whose neighborhood is dangerous, and who rightly believe that they are being unfairly targeted by police. Both how common these factors are and how important they are to actual outcomes is borne out by extensive research.

The scientific truth is that we have no data either way that can even begin to address whether one group is innately better than any other. The reason being that we have no way to separate out the impact of racism and history from innate ability. Read https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691190808/th... if you want a more complete accounting of that fact.

But you do not need to have an opinion on that question to identify many factors that are helping ensure that black kids don't get a fair shake at life. And it is obvious that affirmative action can be at best too little, too late, compared to the things most urgently in need of fixing.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#376

Post by erikpukinskis » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:23 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #365

erikpukinskis wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic hypotheses for the pro-affirmative action crowd are: 1) Black people are not actually less “good at stuff”, we just have a habit of defining “stuff” in a way that excludes the things that black people are more likely to excel at. And, 2) Where black people do statistically worse, it’s not due to any innate difference, it’s because socially accepted “normal” support systems are more useful for people with ch…

Which of these basic hypotheses supports reparations? I'm pretty sure there needs to be a 3) blacks are poorer as well.

You can shift the analysis from “black” to “poor” or “poor and black” or “poor and white” but it doesn’t get you out of the subjectivity trap.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#377

Post by 8note » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:23 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #365

erikpukinskis wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic hypotheses for the pro-affirmative action crowd are: 1) Black people are not actually less “good at stuff”, we just have a habit of defining “stuff” in a way that excludes the things that black people are more likely to excel at. And, 2) Where black people do statistically worse, it’s not due to any innate difference, it’s because socially accepted “normal” support systems are more useful for people with ch…

Which of these basic hypotheses supports reparations? I'm pretty sure there needs to be a 3) blacks are poorer as well.

Take both of the two, and add the theory of compounding interest

They're poor now because they were prevented from gaining wealth then, and wealth grows geometrically

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#378

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:23 PM UTC

somethoughts wrote: post #372

bnralt wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a simple and effective way of achieving the goals they claim to be championing. And what are the real goals of these institutions? The whole approach of having artificially limited education where people are sifted into higher and lower status classes based upon judgements made when they're teenagers is premised on elitism, not equity. That's the purpose of these institutions - not to education as many peop…

To your point, the biggest issue that I see is that elite schools are not growing physically to accept more students. When the eliteness is built on exclusivity versus the quality of the education/graduates that pits admissions of legacy versus new admits. Its kind of like when Nokia used to sell the mobile phones with gold plating and the only way to get one was via an invite from an influencer. Basically creating t…

[deleted]

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#379

Post by lordnacho » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:27 PM UTC

gadders wrote: post #367

lordnacho wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think standardized tests were the way to go, but... My kid recently went through another testing gauntlet, which is the 11+ test. For those who aren't in the Southeast corner of the UK, this is a multiple choice type test that looks a lot like an IQ test in some ways. It's a single sitting and determines whether you are allowed into something called a Grammar School, which is just a selective school, and th…

I live in the southeast of the UK and my daughter took the 11+ and passed. She also went to a private prep school. Private schools don't give as much 11+ help as you would think - if a child passes the 11+, the private lose all the potential senior school fees. Tutoring for the exam definitely helps, but it's mostly exam technique and practise on those types of logical reasoning questions. They can't do the questions…

Well if you look at the scores, about 25% of a year group passes the test. It's something like 16% of state school kids and 36% of independent schools. Unfortunately the guy who compiled these stats closed down his website, so it's not so easy for me to look up.

The variation is enormous though. My kid's school is boasting about 95% of their kids passing the test. I know they've been prepping the test because well, that's what the kid has been doing for past couple of years.

> if a child passes the 11+, the private lose all the potential senior school fees.

It's true that some schools try to discourage the kids from taking it for that reason, but of course that's only true if there's a senior school section.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#380

Post by quantumwannabe » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 7:28 PM UTC

DebtDeflation wrote: post #289

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…

I'm white, my wife is Asian, our kids will be applying to university over the next couple of years. We've started to have the conversation about which race they will check off on the application. I'm coming to the conclusion that they have to just check white, as this means they will face less discrimination than if they check Asian. This makes me very uncomfortable, and also just seems absurd.

The best option would be for them to identify as mixed race.