So they will consider what ? Recommendation letters ? Maybe they dont realise that people from disadvantaged groups dont really have the luxury to volunteer at one of those fancy NGOs. Standardized tests are actually except for the super expensive textbooks in the US. If these books for basic education could somehow be made free but oh wait - socialism.
MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
51–60 of 465 posts
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
SAT prep courses advertise that they can increase scores by 100 points but generally they're lying in order to sell more test courses. But the real number is closer to "11 to 15 points on the math section and 6 to 9 points on the verbal."[1] [1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228337033_Using_Lin...
As a former SAT tutor (and a guy who gamed the hell out of the SAT) I have trouble believing that. There are only a few classes of questions they ask on the test, and if you master them the whole test is a walk in the park. Maybe the problem is most students just don't give a damn about the classes their parents make them take? Can someone explain the findings in this paper?
The SAT is designed to be an intelligence test, not a course final, and it's possible that the large team of education and psychometrics people who've been working on it for decades know what they're doing.
Armchair speculation: there are probably some really bright kids out there with poor test-taking skills, and prep likely has a dramatic effect on scores for them, but most students are not that.
Did you actually sit an SAT before you started gaming? What was your improvement?
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#53This is indeed a strange decision for MIT. The conventional wisdom has long been that the SAT subject tests are MORE predictive of future success at MIT, because the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests. While there are reports of people raising their scores artificially on the non-subject tests by hundreds of points through these short-term methods, the subjects tests…
Some rich trustee's dumb kid probably got "screwed over" by a poor kid who put in insane hours. I dont see how this leads to egalitarian access to education given that on every other metric spoilt idiots carrying rich parents DNA will have an advantage.
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#54I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…
The real scandal that I can't believe hasn't gotten more attention is that wealthy families are hiring psychologists to claim their child has a learning disability. They can then get more time to take the test and due to a policy change a few years ago, this information is hidden from the schools when students report their scores.
Yes, in some circles you are almost considered foolish not to get this accommodation.
https://patch.com/massachusetts/newton/30-percent-newton-nor...
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#55I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…
The SAT is not fair. By taking an expensive prep course, you can potentially increase your SAT score by 100 (although that's quite extreme, the average improvement attributed to SAT prep is closer to 20 points). That's a significant, but not earth-shattering improvement: it moves you from the 75th percentile to the 84th, or from the 97th percentile to the 99th.
Now let's compare that to other criteria used in the college admissions process.
It's way easier to have impressive and relevant extracurricular activities if you're rich and go to a good school. And unlike SAT prep, acquiring good extracurriculars will definitely take years of your time and money.
Well-written admissions essay? MIT requires one. But you do it at home, instead of a tightly controlled testing center. So if you're rich enough, you can have ghost-written admissions essays. Needless to say, this process can turn even a completely worthless essay into an impressive one.
Creative portfolio? Unless you're in the 99th percentile of musical talent, the difference between "I write songs that I play on an old guitar" and "an orchestra performed my composition" is money. The former is probably not even 75th percentile; the latter, probably 95+.
Alumni parents who would be likely to donate big bucks? You don't need an expensive prep course to get that, yet it can provide your application with a much bigger boost than 100 SAT points. And unlike the SAT, if you don't have alumni parents to begin with, then you'll never get this boost, no matter how much extra work you put in.
The SAT is not fair. But it's the fairest admissions criterion used by U.S. universities today.
(note: MIT still relies on the SAT; today's announcement concerns the SAT Subject Tests)
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#56Note to those who haven't been in high school for some time: these aren't the main test. The main test still gets considered (in addition to your parents' money) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_Subject_Tests
> (in addition to your parents' money)
That is not true. MIT is need blind which means it doesn't consider financial needs [1].
[1] https://mitadmissions.org/afford/cost-aid-basics/access-affo...
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#57Anybody cheering the exclusion of some test or other, because it was a pain to study for in high school, is simply not noticing the frog-boiling secondary effects going on. Every bit of emphasis taken out of objective results mean more advantage for smooth talking, photogenic, well-connected people.
Yes, some misguided parents waste thousands of dollars on SAT courses. But students can also prep using the $20 official book, which is what I did, and what I still regard as the best option. Even if money helps incrementally for tests, it helps for everything else even more. International volunteer work? An inspiring (i.e. college counselor approved) essay? Recommendation letters from authoritative people? Anything that requires equipment, like computer labs or robotics? It all costs money -- and in many cases literally measures nothing besides how much money you have.
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#58"Any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes."
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a former SAT tutor (and a guy who gamed the hell out of the SAT) I have trouble believing that. There are only a few classes of questions they ask on the test, and if you master them the whole test is a walk in the park. Maybe the problem is most students just don't give a damn about the classes their parents make them take? Can someone explain the findings in this paper?
The SAT is designed to be an intelligence test, not a course final, and it's possible that the large team of education and psychometrics people who've been working on it for decades know what they're doing. Armchair speculation: there are probably some really bright kids out there with poor test-taking skills, and prep likely has a dramatic effect on scores for them , but most students are not that. Did you actually…
> it's possible that the large team of education and psychometrics people who've been working on it for decades know what they're doing
Don't assume that society is optimizing for what's socially optimal.
Back when it was on a 1600 point scale, I got a 1300 on the first practice test for my SAT course. When I took the test for real, I got a 1570.
Re: MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions
#60I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to increase scores over 100 points. I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2 weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and meeting stud…
SAT prep courses advertise that they can increase scores by 100 points but generally they're lying in order to sell more test courses. But the real number is closer to "11 to 15 points on the math section and 6 to 9 points on the verbal."[1] [1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228337033_Using_Lin...
Not only that, but these prep courses tend to assign practice SATs that are harder in the beginning and easier at the end, to give the impression of rapid progress.