Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students • Hacker News Board

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#491

Post by hintymad » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:11 AM UTC

BobbyJo wrote: post #285

The greatest source of admissions inequity is childhood socioeconomic status. Dropping the SAT is so obviously not a fix for that I question the competency of the administrators who thought doing so was a good idea. The SAT is probably the most attainable piece of the application process for a poor kid to succeed at. You literally just need a guide book or two and enough time to study. One good smart friend helps if…

> The greatest source of admissions inequity is childhood socioeconomic status

Agreed, and good public schools can be of great help. Only when public schools fail do tutoring and socioeconomic status matter. No, I'm not talking about frills like one ipad per kid or low kid-to-teacher ratio or amazing extra-curriculums. I'm talking about teachers who can really explain concepts and deliver inspiring homework. I'm talking about an incentive system that students are motivated to learn instead of mocking those who try as "teacher's pets". I'm talking about an incentive system that ordinary students like me are pushed to achieve excellence even when they do not feel like studying. Really, it really does not require much to learn high school curriculum. It just requires a lot of dedication from teachers and students. Take a look at Asian countries. The have millions of students who went through daily hardship, yet they had a national system that drives students and teachers to focus on learning what matters, even though they can't necessarily afford what kids in the US can enjoy.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#492

Post by hintymad » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:14 AM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #321

BobbyJo wrote: post #285

The greatest source of admissions inequity is childhood socioeconomic status. Dropping the SAT is so obviously not a fix for that I question the competency of the administrators who thought doing so was a good idea. The SAT is probably the most attainable piece of the application process for a poor kid to succeed at. You literally just need a guide book or two and enough time to study. One good smart friend helps if…

Part of the argument for dropping the SAT is that the SAT has been shown to be a proxy for family socio-economic status and is no better an indicator of success at college than GPA, honor/AP/IB course participation, and extracurriculars. (I’m not making that argument myself, I haven’t seen numbers explained well enough to form a solid opinion)

The problem of SAT is that it's too easy, or at least too easy to be gamed by tutoring. That is, family with means can really improve their kids' scores by throwing money. Make SAT as challenging as India's JEE or those national entrance exams in East Asian countries, and we will see that tutoring hardly will matter in large scale but teacher's quality will do.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#493

Post by StanislavPetrov » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:26 AM UTC

dTal wrote: post #451

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Let me reiterate: that requires for it occur to a student that you even can increase your SAT score. If you are a high school student and the possibility of increasing your score doesn't even occur to you, I would suggest that college isn't for you.

Would you study for an IQ test? Perhaps, but then is that fair? If you do, what is actually being measured? Certainly not IQ anymore. Maybe it doesn't occur to students that they should attempt to increase their score because they have a certain innocent model of the world, perhaps one in which they put trust in educational institutions to (as they claim to do) tell them how they should best achieve personal success.…

>Would you study for an IQ test?

I'd study for any test that was consequential to my future.

>Maybe it doesn't occur to students that they should attempt to increase their score

In my opinion, if it doesn't occur to someone that they can better their score on any test by studying, then they aren't ready for college. Studying isn't some sort of arcane concept available only to the privileged few.

>Reminder: you are responding to a commenter who is telling you that an offhand comment literally changed their life.

This is Hacker News, not a struggle session. It isn't disrespectful to tell people they aren't equipped and/or ready for higher education. It is one thing to argue that some people don't have the resources to access study courses, materials or have the free time to do so (due to work requirements or living conditions), it is entirely another thing to suggest that it would never occur to a college candidate that studying for a test would improve their chances of doing well.

>because they have a certain innocent model of the world, perhaps one in which they put trust in educational institutions to (as they claim to do) tell them how they should best achieve personal success. If it were a valuable use of their time, surely someone would tell them?

Perhaps this comment will inform some potential college-bound student, who has otherwise had their life crippled by a childlike dependence on whatever information (or lack thereof) was spoon-fed to them by incompetent school authorities, that studying will help increase their test scores. That would be a win-win!

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#494

Post by TexanFeller » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:27 AM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #321

BobbyJo wrote: post #285

The greatest source of admissions inequity is childhood socioeconomic status. Dropping the SAT is so obviously not a fix for that I question the competency of the administrators who thought doing so was a good idea. The SAT is probably the most attainable piece of the application process for a poor kid to succeed at. You literally just need a guide book or two and enough time to study. One good smart friend helps if…

Part of the argument for dropping the SAT is that the SAT has been shown to be a proxy for family socio-economic status and is no better an indicator of success at college than GPA, honor/AP/IB course participation, and extracurriculars. (I’m not making that argument myself, I haven’t seen numbers explained well enough to form a solid opinion)

GPA is utter horse hockey, at least in the high schools I grew up around. Grade inflation is so rampant in some schools that 80+% of students have an A or better average. Our valedictorian took classes like "Honors Ag[riculture]" that were trivial, but were graded on a 110 point scale. She also cried to the teacher in front of the class after every single assignment she made less than an A+ on and sent her mom in to cry if that didn't work. IMO GPA is one of the most hackable metrics and should play absolutely no part in college admissions.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#495

Post by yzsh » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:30 AM UTC

gumby wrote: post #252

Why even pretend that admission is in some sense "fair"? I don't mean this as a "anti-woke" or "pro-woke" harangue, or as a middle school cynical pose. Admission in the USA is a manual and largely arbitrary process. Just like judges' rulings, it's influenced by which person happened to read the application, what they had for breakfast and what time of day it is. Plus random factors like the orchestra's french horn pl…

No post body was provided.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#496

Post by appletrotter » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:32 AM UTC

patrick451 wrote: post #473

dTal wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you study for an IQ test? Perhaps, but then is that fair? If you do, what is actually being measured? Certainly not IQ anymore. Maybe it doesn't occur to students that they should attempt to increase their score because they have a certain innocent model of the world, perhaps one in which they put trust in educational institutions to (as they claim to do) tell them how they should best achieve personal success.…

If an IQ test were required for admission to university or anything else I wanted to do, you're damn right I would study. Why would I care if that is fair or if I corrupt the measurement by studying if increasing my score benefits me? The validity of the measurement is the school's problem, not mine.

It seems like you might have a history of applying adaptive behaviors, that is good.

How have you avoided maladaptive behaviors, perhaps such as procrastinating or distracting oneself with substance?

Do you believe that nature or nurture has played a larger role in your healthy response to environmental pressures?

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#497

Post by nomel » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:36 AM UTC

Meekro wrote: post #373

actually_a_dog wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s right. And guess who does know that SAT prep is a thing and takes full advantage of it? If you said “rich kids and their parents,” you win the prize.

Not just the rich. I was an immigrant kid, and knew plenty of other immigrant kids. None of our families had much money, but we all had a do-or-die attitude about education and the SAT. You can bet we all knew about prep options, scholarships, etc. and we milked every advantage for all it was worth.

In my public school, the SAT was never discussed during school. Not once, until the test was announced, the week before. No other information, besides “The SAT is next week”. This was after a long stretch of standardized testing that happens in CA schools. It’s definitely something you had to know/find out about, outside of everything. This was in a well off community in California, US.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#498

Post by nomel » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 2:39 AM UTC

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #493

dTal wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you study for an IQ test? Perhaps, but then is that fair? If you do, what is actually being measured? Certainly not IQ anymore. Maybe it doesn't occur to students that they should attempt to increase their score because they have a certain innocent model of the world, perhaps one in which they put trust in educational institutions to (as they claim to do) tell them how they should best achieve personal success.…

>Would you study for an IQ test? I'd study for any test that was consequential to my future. >Maybe it doesn't occur to students that they should attempt to increase their score In my opinion, if it doesn't occur to someone that they can better their score on any test by studying, then they aren't ready for college. Studying isn't some sort of arcane concept available only to the privileged few. >Reminder: you are re…

> I'd study for any test that was consequential to my future.

This makes the very large assumption that you’re aware the SAT has anything to do with your future, and that’s it’s not another one of the half dozen standardized tests that you take every year, neither of which was communicated in my public school. I’ve heard from many that my school was not unique.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#499

Post by SamBam » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 3:10 AM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #492

alistairSH wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the argument for dropping the SAT is that the SAT has been shown to be a proxy for family socio-economic status and is no better an indicator of success at college than GPA, honor/AP/IB course participation, and extracurriculars. (I’m not making that argument myself, I haven’t seen numbers explained well enough to form a solid opinion)

The problem of SAT is that it's too easy, or at least too easy to be gamed by tutoring. That is, family with means can really improve their kids' scores by throwing money. Make SAT as challenging as India's JEE or those national entrance exams in East Asian countries, and we will see that tutoring hardly will matter in large scale but teacher's quality will do.

Are you saying that students with money to spend on tutors don't do better at the JEE or Chinese entrance exams?

I don't know otherwise, but that seems unlikely to me, so I'm interested if you have any evidence that poor kids pass these exams at the same rate.

Re: Colleges that ditched admission tests find it harder to fairly choose students

#500

Post by SamBam » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 3:21 AM UTC

polynox wrote: post #432

pannSun wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If culturally-discriminating WASP admissions officers were the main barrier, one would not expect non-Jewish whites to be the most underrepresented group in the Ivy League. Circa 2019, looking at non-international students only: Ivy League US Ratio Mean SAT score [1] Jewish 17.2% 2.4% 7.16 n/a Asian 19.6% 5.3% 3.71 1216 White (incl. Jewish) 50.3% 61.5% 0.82 1148 Hispanic 11.4% 17.6% 0.65 1043 Black 7.8% 12.7% 0.61 96…

Why would you take U.S. population rather than world population?

This is a very good point. In particular, it completely throws out the "overrepresentation" ratio for Asian students. What's the actual ratio by number of applications?