Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 959 posts

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

#551

Post by remote_phone »

ryanobjc wrote: post #536
remote_phone wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pre-rigging? I’ve worked my ass off for nearly 30 years, as has my wife. We are both smart and very hard working and it paid off. My roots are middle class at best. My parents are immigrants and were extremely poor as children but they also worked hard and went from poverty to middle class. I’m teaching my children to work hard and be good people and contribute to this world. How pray tell am I benefiting from “pre-r…

So, some kids from crappy schools and neighborhoods will get into college, when they might not otherwise, presumably taking the place of you/your children, who have “made solid decisions” and “worked my ass off for 30 years” who deserve it more? Because you/they worked harder? Ok. Cool. Just want to make sure I understand.

People who work hard deserve the fruits of their labor, regardless of their economic status. I have no problems with economically disadvantaged hard working people getting into great colleges, I have problems with equally hardworking people being disadvantaged because their parents are successful.

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

#552

Post by brankoB »

berbec wrote: post #234
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.

Isn't it both? There are only X spots per school. Every person being helped up and admitted is someone being pulled back and denied. I have no opinion on this debate, but school admissions are a zero-sum-game, afaik.

In terms of school admissions I would agree. In terms of society in general however i'm not entirely convinced that it's a zero sum game.

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

#553

Post by CydeWeys »

darawk wrote: post #533
jhayward wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. So, you're saying that people who have the misfortune to have parents who can't do those things for them should suffer a handicap, right? How well you are able to compete for a slot in college should depend on who your parents are?

> So, you're saying that people who have the misfortune to have parents who can't do those things for them should suffer a handicap, right? Yes, for the reasons that I outlined. If you don't reward kids for their parents investment, their parents won't invest, and that will be worse for everyone. If you spending 1 hour or 10 hours teaching your kids at night makes no difference to their life outcomes, which will you…

This line of argumentation falls flat to me because the kids that are better educated by their parents will undoubtedly have better lifelong outcomes, regardless of what college it enables them to get into.

There's a lot more to success in life than what college you go to. Going to Harvard is pretty worthless if you haven't even been set up with the skills to be able to graduate, for instance -- which the kid with highly invested parents is more likely to have.

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

#555

Post by cpncrunch »

Sebguer wrote: post #260
GhostVII wrote: post #215

I think instead of trying to lower the bar for low income students, we should work on solving the actual problems causing them to perform more poorly on the SAT (or adjust the SAT so it is more representative of their actual skills). If students are accepted with a lower SAT score because of their background, they are likely going to struggle in University, since they have lower scores than the rest of their class, s…

How do you suggest solving a problem that comes down effectively to 'some people have more money and free time'? Not everyone can afford high quality tutoring, and high quality tutoring clearly has an impact on test scores.

>Not everyone can afford high quality tutoring, and high quality tutoring clearly has an impact on test scores.

There are a number of organizations offering free online tutoring, such as https://learntobe.org. https://weteachscience.org used to provide free STEM tutoring to students in disadvantaged schools, but they recently shut down...I think it was difficult getting stable funding.

There is no technical reason why high quality tutoring couldn't be offered to all these students. It's simply a matter of arranging the funding. I think a workable non-profit business model would be to arrange long-term funding from some government organization. If anyone is interested in setting up a business like this, feel free to email me and I can provide contacts and technology (I work with online tutoring companies, including the two listed above).

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

#556

Post by sadris »

serf wrote: post #394
marrone12 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the system of discrimination that nevertheless has white and asian men disproportionately over-represented in silicon valley, tech companies, and government.

Do you believe that homogeneous distribution is something that occurs anywhere in society?

It occurs in most non-merit based social settings. 95% of all churches are 95% homogeneous. Racial groups self segregate at lunch tables. 85% of millennials don't have a single friend outside their own racial group.

In merit based settings like employement, the employer is going to be selecting for IQ so the racial demographic of the employees is irrelevant, only their productivity.

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

#557

Post by sporkland »

bruceb wrote: post #180
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I’m getting pushed further and further to the right. Maybe not, it feels like to me that the Overton window[0] has been sliding left. My views on freedom of speech made me a 'leftist commie' when I used them to defend South Park and Eminem now most often I'm accused being 'alt-right' by those who disagree with those same views. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Unfortunately this is true. Some on the left have become 1980s republicans when it comes to free speech, Russia, and the goodness of big business.

Tipper Gore and other Democrats lead the charge with the PMRC which created parental advisory stickers and age restriction on music. I felt like both sides were down to restrict expression in the 80's and 90's

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

#558

Post by sokoloff »

lallysingh wrote: post #92
leetcrew wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because (we're meant to assume at least) that's why they did poorly in the test in the first place?

I don't think the factor is for kids who did poorly. This is a bonus (AFAICT) added on top of a reasonable test result. One that indicates that the student had some hardship that they overcame to get the result. Which should make the result count more as the kid had to go through more to get it done. Who's more impressive on average? Students with a 1200 SAT in an area with low crime and upper middle class income, or…

What if the former scores 1220 and the latter 1200? That's the concerning case, IMO. If both kids scored 1200, I'm indifferent as to whether a desirable school offers admission to 0, 1, or both of them.

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

#559

Post by Apocryphon »

fiblye wrote: post #530
spamizbad wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And for private universities it's a big blow to the institution's reputations for all but the most objectionable speakers. 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 compone…

Let me preface by saying I disagree with everything you say, but I still think you have the right to say it. Universities are meant to be institutions of learning. Learning isn’t always comfortable. Some long held truths turn out to be wrong at some point. What we all think is true or right right now could completely reverse in a decade. Letting people speak especially when it’s against your morals is important for l…

> Universities are meant to be institutions of learning.

They should be, but in this country they are essentially businesses now, and so will likely have the same institutions (TOS and so forth) accordingly.

Post reply on HN