SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships • Hacker News Board

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#541

Post by tropo » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:52 AM UTC

kaitai wrote: post #484

verylongname wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why this is getting downvoted. The United States has a system of de jure discrimination against white and asian men. Moreover, there is a great deal of de facto discretization against them as well. Many people seem to think that it is "fair" and appropriate for this to be the case, but I don't think its debatable that this is the fact of the matter. I think those who support this policy should defend it…

Could you explain what the US system of de jure discrimination against white and asian men consists of? Genuinely curious.

An example is the federal contracting rules that specifically require that some contracts be awarded to companies that are not run by white males.

This of course is gamed. The common case for a small contractor is that a woman is officially running the business but her husband is really doing it. Large contractors subcontract out to these small contractors for no reason other than to fill quotas. It is often make-work nonsense, paying them even though there is no reason other than the quota to have them working on the project. In other words, it is government waste.

There are people who make a career out of filling these quotas.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#542

Post by Apocryphon » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:54 AM UTC

deogeo wrote: post #213

LanceH wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the zero sum game of admissions, boosting someone else for their poor location/school impacts those who sacrificed to get score better without the boost. A poor asian community that sends their kids to after school schools and does very well as a whole will suddenly fight themselves without the boost that others at that economic level might have. All theoretical at this point I guess. I would prefer to let this pl…

> A poor asian community that sends their kids to after school schools and does very well as a whole will suddenly fight themselves without the boost that others at that economic level might have. They'll also be punished for having established a low-crime neighborhood and learning english, since crime level and english as second language are also factors in the adversity score. Of course, no single one of them is en…

Who's to say that their lower-income status doesn't out-weigh the other factors you're describing?

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#543

Post by bufbupa » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:55 AM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #531

lettergram wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know that promoting affirmative action is tantamount to blasphemy on this site, but let's be honest here. Yes, let's be honest! I was from one of those locations where "adversity" would have benefited me. Worst school district in the state, low income, etc. I am and I suspect will continue to be upset that the harder I work, the less benefit I receive. I pulled myself out of that situation. People in similar situ…

> I am and I suspect will continue to be upset that the harder I work, the less benefit I receive . It seems logical and reasonable to give more help to those who need it more. And realistically, you're always going to be way better off by maximizing your own success (even if it means you might get less help) than by minimizing your own success and maximally relying on help. A life lived solely on assistance isn't re…

So I'm curious, do you believe we should switch to a communist economic model as well? Allocate resources based off who "needs it more" seems to be flirting with that ideology. A life lived solely on assistance is better than a life toiled for no gain it would seem.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#544

Post by wetpaws » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:57 AM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #531

lettergram wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know that promoting affirmative action is tantamount to blasphemy on this site, but let's be honest here. Yes, let's be honest! I was from one of those locations where "adversity" would have benefited me. Worst school district in the state, low income, etc. I am and I suspect will continue to be upset that the harder I work, the less benefit I receive. I pulled myself out of that situation. People in similar situ…

> I am and I suspect will continue to be upset that the harder I work, the less benefit I receive . It seems logical and reasonable to give more help to those who need it more. And realistically, you're always going to be way better off by maximizing your own success (even if it means you might get less help) than by minimizing your own success and maximally relying on help. A life lived solely on assistance isn't re…

Should we increase the score for people who are less intelligent and have worse grades on average? They would need it more.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#545

Post by lenkite » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:58 AM UTC

learc83 wrote: post #228

danmaz74 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, if you make a sacrifice to earn something, that something isn't a privilege.

Your parents making a sacrifice isn't the same thing as you making a sacrifice. If my dad makes a sacrifice by working 100 hours a week to buy me a Maserati, the car is definitely a privilege not something I earned. And yeah, I may have lost out on spending time with my dad, but that wasn't a choice I made, so while it cost me something it wasn't a sacrifice on my part.

For many Asian-American's their children's education is a dream that they plan out and sacrifice for so that their kin can have better opportunity than what they managed for themselves. Many are tightly knit families where children look after parents or other close family members later in life. To penalise and denigrate the efforts of such families as "privilege" is awful.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#546

Post by manfredo » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:59 AM UTC

spamizbad wrote: post #532

manfredo wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Numerous private universities (Christian schools in particular) enforce strict student code of conduct rules that severely limit the student body's freedom of expression as to way to enforce religious or secular compliance. And it doesn't hurt their reputation but instead is an integral component of the school's identity. Perhaps you're coming from a different cultural context than, but in my circles such universit…

> Some people don't even consider applicants from BYU, and other heavily religious universities because they don't want to reward such institutions. That's just religious discrimination cloaked in something less intolerable: academic elitism. HBCUs probably face a similar problem: should we abolish or enforce strict racial quotes on them because there are racists who will toss a resume with Howard University on it? >…

> That's just religious discrimination cloaked in something less intolerable: academic elitism.

I don't necessarily agree with tossing such resumes in the garbage, but it is evidence that universities that enforce religious dogma on their students do suffer a hit to their reputation because of that.

> how do you explain the strong performance (and reputation) of private institutions vs. "state schools"?

Not every private school is Stanford, MIT, etc. Plenty of private schools are shitty for-profit enterprises (especially online universities) that essentially scam customers out of their money. Purely on the basis of return on investment many studies also conclude that public university is better than private universities.

Also most reputable private university do respect freedom of speech and expression to a similar degree as public universities. If you factor in the reactions of students, perhaps even better. When Berkeley hosted Milo Y students rioted, smashed up cars, etc. When Stanford hosted Dinesh D'Souza it was very tame with protesters being non-disruptive. Public universities aren't immune from going off the deep end regardless of constitutional protection: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM

Again, the private schools with good reputations do behave almost as if the First Amendment applied to them. The ones that don't generally aren't reputable. So your question is based on false premise.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#547

Post by CydeWeys » Fri, May 17, 2019, 2:59 AM UTC

darawk wrote: post #510

kaitai wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you spell out how it devalues the efforts of parents to improve their children's education?

Sure. The adversity score looks at things like the crime rate of the neighborhood you grew up in. That neighborhood is (primarily) a function of two things: Your parents income level, and their ability to prioritize what income they do have to make sure you're in a good neighborhood. The second thing is what's being de-valued. Some parents work really hard and pinch every penny to devote resources to their kid's educ…

The kid who gets a better education is still better off. High school isn't just a means to an end of going to college; you're learning lots of valuable things while you go there, that will help you for the rest of your life. And you're also being set up for better success in college because of that foundation.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#548

Post by seizethecheese » Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:01 AM UTC

If colleges are doing this anyway, then this is just a standardized way to do the scoring. This is basically a service the college board is providing to colleges.

This could be seen as a good thing, even if you don’t like affirmative action. Instead of relying on crude metrics like zip code, race and income, this will allow for a more granular approach. If we are going to give a leg up to the disadvantaged (and therefore a push down for the advantages) we might as well do as good of a job as possible.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#549

Post by gnicholas » Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:04 AM UTC

savrajsingh wrote: post #508

gnicholas wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently heard of a high earning family that bought a rental/investment property in EPA, then when their kid got into the Tinsley program (school busing from EPA to Palo Alto/Menlo/Portola/Woodside) they decided to move there full time. Their kid now goes to a fancy school and they live in a development in EPA near Facebook HQ. So to all the naysayers, people are already doing crazy stuff like this to help their ki…

Perhaps a side benefit of this crazy score is forced gentrification of all areas until their score falls to 50 /s

Or it will just drive up rents in low-income areas, as wealthy parents rent (but do not live in) apartments in order to game this system.

Re: SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

#550

Post by brankoB » Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:07 AM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #290

brankoB wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an anger at helping others catch up, but an anger at pulling people back. We can help people who are behind without sacrificing the people who are already ahead.

>>We can help people who are behind without sacrificing the people who are already ahead. Again, the problem is you are viewing the world through a certain lens, where people are "ahead" or "behind".

Oh I see now, I totally misinterpreted your comment, sorry.