Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles • Hacker News Board

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#631

Post by TimPC » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:13 PM UTC

30829984 wrote: post #621

TimPC wrote: post #612

The SAT being a help to low-income students shows how messed up the US high school system is. Normally standardized tests hurt low-income students because they require extra-curricular resources to do well on. In the US they hurt poor students less because the GPA system is so badly broken. AP courses are not offered in the poorest schools but offer such large bonuses to GPA that a 4.0 GPA is considered very poor for…

> A student can literally have a perfect GPA in the best courses offered by their school and be considered a very poor applicant academically. Do you have a source for this?

It’s literally two straightforward google searches. Search “university entrance GPA admissions USA” has a top result that shows that Ivy League admissions have weighted GPAs above 4.0. Searching “course offerings poor us high schools” shows some high schools only offer courses where 4.0 is the top GPA.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#632

Post by notananthem » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:15 PM UTC

ralmidani wrote: post #596

I would like to know how much of an “improvement” in outcomes these tests bring. From another article linked in the one from this discussion: “In short: Our research has shown that, in most cases, we cannot reliably predict students will do well at MIT unless we consider standardized test results alongside grades, coursework, and other factors. These findings are statistically robust and stable over time, and hold wh…

This is the best outcome but then you don't get "prestigious" schools of the elite. I went to a public university and I'm much better off for it than my MIT peers.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#633

Post by strikelaserclaw » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:15 PM UTC

aj7 wrote: post #592

johnnyanmac wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Of course the real tragedy is that we fixate so much on college, even prestigious ones, at all given how unnecessary they are for making people into productive and happy human beings. This change is significant but affects less than one percent of the population each year.. I'm ambivalent because I sympathize with both sides of the equation. One one hand, I have the hindsight now that I didn't at 18 to realize that…

Yes, prestigious schools open a huge number of doors. But more importantly, they teach elite mannerisms, standards and beliefs, and prejudices. If you are not a true genius (true geniuses can always make their way, but they are rare, even at MIT et al), this knowledge is invaluable and irreplaceable. I’ll give you an example from my own career. I went to MIT/Berkeley, SB/PhD. But I practically washed out of grad scho…

yes, true geniuses are a rare breed and a university gets more benefit from admitting a true genius than vice versa (Did harvard get more out of bill gates or bill gates out of harvard? I would argue Harvard got way more out of that exchange). But for the plethora of above average, hard workers going to a top school is still a pretty good deal.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#634

Post by ramraj07 » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:18 PM UTC

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #593

sparrc wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agreed. I could also buy a test prep book on amazon plus get a few others from the school and public libraries for a grand total of $15 spent on test prep. That's a lot cheaper than dedicating my working summer to smarmy volunteer/extra-curricular projects.

I went to high school in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and almost all of the top academic students in my class were first or second generation immigrants (mostly Indian) that had no interest in extra-curricular activities like sports, band, choir, or really anything. It's important that people, especially immigrants, can get into these schools based solely on their test scores and not have to do any of the other trivial…

So someone who plays drums in band or throws an egg shaped “ball” (or worse, hits themselves in the head like rams) is contributing to the society than someone who focuses on tests?

I’m not even on the side of the Asian families that force their children to study and study alone, but your comment seems to suggest that somehow they don’t have the right to (or are abusing a system). Sounds a bit prejudiced. In the end families which want their kids to “look successful” will make them do whatever is needed, and merely focusing on studies is just one flavor. Look at the Tiger mom bs about Carnegie Hall or Yale law. But at the least they are fully American in their right to do so, and I’d rather have more of them than broken families with kids not even being taken care of.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#635

Post by smolder » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:19 PM UTC

davesque wrote: post #478

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #191

Definitely for the best. Standardized testing was pretty much the only reason I and many other working class folks I know could get into good schools -- I was never going to do a million side activities, and my summers were spent working, not building my academic resume. Of course the real tragedy is that we fixate so much on college, even prestigious ones, at all given how unnecessary they are for making people into…

> Of course the real tragedy is that we fixate so much on college This is what gets me. The whole concept of college, and especially selective, high profile colleges such as Harvard, MIT, etc., seems antiquated and almost entirely manufactured at this point. It's artificially crafted scarcity designed to create a market and brand. I feel the true, primary function of these institutions is to give the rich and powerfu…

The scarcity isn't artificial, I don't think. There are limits on how many people a given faculty can teach, beyond which teaching becomes much less effective. People with reject letters are probably not significantly less deserving, but there's no fair non-competitive means to decide who gets a go, IMO. The competition could certainly be fairer, as with most things.

If your main point is that less prestigious schools can potentially deliver on education just as well, and the main difference becomes the marketability of the degree and superficial status, well... I agree.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#636

Post by runarberg » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:19 PM UTC

outlace wrote: post #470

I used to be against standardized tests, but I grew up as a low-income minority in a single-parent household and I ended up getting into good schools pretty much only due to my high test scores, which has been a life changer. Other than test scores, I couldn't afford to do any fancy extra-curriculars. It felt a lot more achievable to know I can change my life if I just focus and do well on a test than it would if I h…

Seriously, is there no talk about how unfair the notion of extra-curricular activities is in the US? It is one of these things that gave me a major culture shock moving into the US. Things like giving an advantage to people that have so many hours of volunteer work feels a really blatant way to give an unfair advantage to folks that are already way privileged and over represented.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#637

Post by scarmig » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:19 PM UTC

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #479

rayiner wrote: post #447

I don't think people appreciate the radical nature of the attacks on standardized testing. Standardized tests have been critical to higher education and the professions for almost a century. Virtually everyone in an elite academic, government, scientific, legal, medical, or financial role attained that role based, in part, on the SAT and similar exams like the LSAT or MCAT. Not only them, but everyone who taught and…

> If the SAT is not predictive, as some claim, we've been selecting our elites and professionals the wrong way for three generations. Yes, and? The easiest way to understand the shortcomings of these tests (at least their older versions) is to realize that students who use paid SAT/ACT-prep materials and services get higher scores than students who don't. Yes, there are confounding factors, but this fact alone is fai…

The issue with this comment and opponents of standardized testing more generally is that they compare standardized tests against some purely theoretical ideal metric that perfectly captures "merit," however it's defined.

The reality is that standardized testing doesn't need to be absolutely perfectly fair to be something worth keeping; it just needs to be fairer than selecting students who had the opportunity to be captain of the lacrosse team. That is a far lower bar that it easily exceeds.

This is the point where standardized testing opponents will typically rhetorically concede that they also are opposed to that unfairness, but they never manage to get particularly incensed about athletic or legacy admissions.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#638

Post by strikelaserclaw » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:21 PM UTC

muh_gradle wrote: post #618

tomkat0789 wrote: post #293

I hated taking the SAT/ACT, but holy cow are we in the US in a better situation than Chinese students dealing with the Gaokao. A Chinese pen-pal once showed me some calculus problems from the Gaokao and the example I saw (a bunch of integrals) looked like a math test a sadist would create: long, complicated expressions just for the sake of complexity, "ugly" numbers that turned into messy fractions you have to carry…

I have a hard time seeing US standardized testing as "better." All of my Korean peers who have studied for the CSAT or Suneung laugh at how easy the SAT/ACT math section is in comparison. K-12 education in the US is years behind at this point from many Asian countries. The fact that we are debating whether standardized testing for colleges and prestigious high schools (Lowell in SF, Stuyvesant in NYC, etc) should be…

I always wonder why these asian countries aren't doing laps around USA or other western countries if they were learning calculus in pre school.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#639

Post by AussieWog93 » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:22 PM UTC

jp0d wrote: post #537

shmde wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes exactly, I remember our Physics teacher in 11-12th grade used to just solve trick questions and asked us to remember shortcuts and rote memorise formulae. I completely fucked up the physics portion of entrance exam and got a mere 7 out of 120 on a national test. I fucking hate physics now.

The Indian education system doesn't care about learning at all. It's all about scoring good grades and getting a job at the end. It's quite important as every individual needs to be able support themselves. However, it's really bad for learning. I'm a product of that. I've been struggling a lot with an online course from MIT but at least I'm enjoying learning a lot of stuff as I'm employed now. Physics and Mathematic…

>The Indian education system doesn't care about learning at all.

Honestly, I think people from other countries get that impression about you guys too. I've been a part of multiple (honestly, quite racist) conversations where we just WTF over the fact that these guys have masters degrees but can't solve the most basic problem assigned to them.

Re: Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

#640

Post by GoodJokes » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 11:25 PM UTC

neovive wrote: post #57

notacoward wrote: post #3

This is just so beautifully written it brings a tear to my eye. It explains their rationale, points to evidence, acknowledges shortcomings or gaps in knowledge, and shows empathy for those affected. Worth reading just for its pedagogical value, plus it's on an important topic near and dear to many hearts.

100%! As a parent of a child about to go through the college admissions process (with his heart set on MIT--of course), I want him to read this particularly for the later part of the article: "...you are also not your MIT application..." The acceptance rate is so low, that it should not be used as a measure of self-worth and accomplishment.

No post body was provided.