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

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

#681

Post by _hardwaregeek » Fri, May 17, 2019, 4:58 AM UTC

nimblerabit wrote: post #429

_hardwaregeek wrote: post #386

Kinda feels like admissions departments are not doing their job/the College Board is attempting to do their job for them. Why should I trust a metric from the College Board? Anybody who has taken an AP test can tell you the courses are in no shape or form close to college level. And the SAT is an exercise in anal perfectionism, not intelligence. I don't trust them to accurately judge the socioeconomic background of a…

When you say AP tests are nowhere close to college level, do you mean they are easier or harder? Personally I think they are morw difficult, but your comment seems to be implying they are easier (and obviously so).

At least for Computer Science A, BC Calculus, Physics C and US History, the tests are nowhere near college level. Plenty of people get 5's on Calculus BC and can't tell you how to derive, say, integration by parts. Or how the Mean Value Theorem works. Or really anything beyond regurgitated power rules, etc. And Physics C? I got a 5 on both tests with some pretty terrible answers. The courses, sure, depending on your school they can be really great and beyond college level. But they'd still be great and beyond college level if they were just regular advanced classes.

Not to mention some AP tests are rather ridiculous. Like AP World, which is a test on all of history. Could you imagine a test on all of math? Plus it doesn't count for anything. AP US History doesn't get me out of any classes. It didn't add anything to my application other than another number. And I didn't really learn much either.

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

#682

Post by lazyasciiart » Fri, May 17, 2019, 4:58 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #549

savrajsingh wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

School zoning is a pretty insanely high-stakes thing, and other parents will absolutely rat them out and provide evidence. Parents have been jailed for using an address they don't live at - https://abcnews.go.com/US/ohio-mom-jailed-sending-kids-schoo...

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

#683

Post by bilbo0s » Fri, May 17, 2019, 4:59 AM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #487

Jill_the_Pill wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you haven't spent much time in a "cheap neighborhood with bad schools." I can assure you that no one there is making $X. In my city, the average household income is $38k; the state average is $74k. Almost all people, including poor people, make sacrifices and want what is best for their kids.

You're missing the point. The original comment in this chain comes from someone whose family made sacrifices in order to live in an area with good educational opportunities. This 'Adversity Score' would penalize them for making that sacrifice. Between two families with identical incomes, the one that chooses to curb luxuries to live in a place with a better school district would be penalized for that choice. The fact…

Yeah, but if you're doing all that, and you're landing between 34 and 36? I mean, let's be frank, Stanford is not looking at you if you're lower than 33. (Unless you have a wicked 3 point shot. Or you're a genius on the piano or something.) So, yeah, you did all that test prep, and end up scoring about the same as some local yokel from Angleton, TX who took the test cold? Or some broke kid from Chicago who took the test cold?

Sure, the Angleton guy's parents may be strung out on opioids or whatever, but I gotta be honest, I'm just not seeing why Stanford takes a chance on you as opposed to just giving it to one of the two kids who've proven they can perform at a high level academically test prep or no test prep?

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

#684

Post by throwawaymath » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:00 AM UTC

sadris wrote: post #556

serf wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I hate to be that person, but could you maybe cite those statistics? I was willing to give a pass on 95% of churches being 95% racially homogeneous, but I'm deeply skeptical the 85% figure is true for all millennials.

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

#685

Post by GreaterFool » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:01 AM UTC

jdmichal wrote: post #412

GreaterFool wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My university (one of the top-ranked in the world) did have some sort of adjusted scaling for the final exams. The raw results were never released. One would get a number somehow adjusted for how to the whole cohort did. So that if some exams turn out to be just too damn hart it won't wipe out everybody. But it was opaque and I really hated that! I did good enough and then went on to do a Masters degree. There I'd ge…

Was this anything more than just grading to a curve? Because yes, that has its ups and downs, but it's certainly not mysterious in any way.

It's mysterious enough if there's no one willing to explain how the system works. Just that the results are adjusted.

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

#686

Post by briandear » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:01 AM UTC

zasz wrote: post #405

rhegart wrote: post #131

Equality of opportunity over outcome for me. Now Asians will be discriminated against secretly. My family sacrificing vacations and eating out for 12 years (literally ate out 5x max) to afford to live in a good school district shouldn’t penalize us. My dad commuted 4 hours daily instead of moving...I’m getting pushed further and further to the right.

As a fellow Asian whose parents also sacrificed a lot, I'm sympathetic, but I would urge you to consider a couple things: 1. Like it or not, plenty of families in America have had it worse than you had, and would not find it at all impressive that you have never gone on a vacation or eaten out. 2. You should save your anger for the huge number of spots saved for legacies and athletes. Being the child of alumni means…

> Is not going to Harvard worth pushing yourself to the right? Worth aligning yourself with the guy pushing a trade war with China, which is going to do wonders for the image of Asians in America? Personally, I don't think so.

Point of fact: the Chinese had tariffs on American goods long before the “trade war.” That isn’t fair and it’s correct to call a government out on that policy. China has been called out by the WTO on numerous occasions and now, somehow Trump is wrong for agreeing with the WTO?[1] France has had high tariffs on American products for a long time, but now Trump is the bad guy? I don’t agree with any tariffs, but when other countries use tariffs, it’s only logical to retailiate.

Secondly, you seem to be suggesting that the OP should just accept not going to Harvard as fair when other people who didn’t work as hard get to go? That is just un-American and the complete opposite of a meritocracy. What do kids that have lower grades and don’t score as well get a preference to the most elite schools in the country? We are outraged when rich people bribe their way into a school, how is this any different? These lower performing students could also go to state schools just as you suggest the OP do. What gives them a right to a school for which they wouldn’t normally qualify? There is real anti-Asian discrimination at many of the Ivy League schools. This is documented and is not unlike the anti-Jew initiatives of years past. May the smartest student win — and if that results in an entirely Asian class at Harvard, so be it. It isn’t like Asians have any super-powers in academics. They’re human like the rest of us, but it might seem that their cultural emphasis on education is paying off. Instead of handicapping Asians, why not try to change the culture of non-Asians to better compete?

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/19/us-wins-wto-ruling-against-c...

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

#687

Post by GreaterFool » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:02 AM UTC

skissane wrote: post #646

GreaterFool wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My university (one of the top-ranked in the world) did have some sort of adjusted scaling for the final exams. The raw results were never released. One would get a number somehow adjusted for how to the whole cohort did. So that if some exams turn out to be just too damn hart it won't wipe out everybody. But it was opaque and I really hated that! I did good enough and then went on to do a Masters degree. There I'd ge…

> My university (one of the top-ranked in the world) did have some sort of adjusted scaling for the final exams. The raw results were never released. One would get a number somehow adjusted for how to the whole cohort did In first year university, I did a semester of Latin. For the first few weeks I was feeling very motivated; then depression hit me. I stopped going to class. What I should have done, is go see a doct…

Wow. That is seriously unfair

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

#688

Post by lazyasciiart » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:03 AM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #276

dangerbird2 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, the reason of the SAT's existence is the convenience of boiling down one's entire academic experience into one number. Perhaps the real problem is that university admissions allow the dualopoly of College Board and ACT control the academic fates of the nation's students with no public accountability.

A university has to reduce a person down to a binary decision to admit or not, not much of a way around that.

Set a standard (SAT score, whatever) and say that students who meet that standard should be capable enough to admit. Then pick randomly from among the applicants who meet your standard. Sounds fair, right?

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

#689

Post by pacala » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:04 AM UTC

astura wrote: post #486

wanderer2323 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Resisting an abusive and insanely overreaching government system is not 'fraud' morally and it probably won't be one legally.

The SAT is administered by College Board which is an entirely private institution.

The federally & state funded public Universities that will fall over each other to employ adversity scores as a pillar of their academic life, on the other hand... One can attempt to outsource responsibility from a legalistic perspective, but from a moral perspective one can't escape it.

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

#690

Post by svd4anything » Fri, May 17, 2019, 5:04 AM UTC

jachee wrote: post #259

GhostVII wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and every non-privileged person who gets in also hurts others who are in the same situation, since they have taken up a spot. The difference is in this case there is an actual policy which is actively punishing people for being in a perceived state of privilege.

Punishing those in privilege is how you achieve equality. They can't give up that inequality voluntarily, and wouldn't if they could.

Wow punishing those in privilege creates equality. The logic “progressive” american politics is pursuing is truly scary and broken.

Hating the rich is hate.

If you really loved the poor you would think how to help them lift themselves up. Holding down the top both doesn’t work and is deeply unethical.

College board should provide free tutoring and review classes based of their adversity score instead.

I can’t image this scheme won’t be challenged in courts. Especially the keeping secret the score, imagine if your credit score was kept secret and this will effect their lives more than credit score.

As I have said in other comments, next we need an Unattractiveness Score as we know physical traits have high correlation and causation to success and wealth, clearly a privilege and creating inequality.

Tax credits for the ugly. Mandatory minor face disfigurement for the overly beautiful or handsome.

Very scary developments. America is under true threat to its future with this politics.