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

861–870 of 959 posts

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

#861

Post by cotelletta »

boomlinde wrote: post #836
jakeogh wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reductio ad absurdum is useful. Sounds like you agree. Idk why label it a slippery slope, it's pretty cut and dry. SAT scores def do determine who gets to work on your heart.

> Reductio ad absurdum is useful. Maybe, but in this case I don't think that it was for the reasons that I've previously stated. > Sounds like you agree. What makes it sound like I agree? The only opinions I've divulged are on the quality of the post as an entry to the debate. > Idk why label it a slippery slope, it's pretty cut and dry. Please offer an opinion on whether its use was legitimate and based on a reasona…

It's a slippery slope because the logic used to rationalize special treatment is that the outcome isn't the same for different people. Whatever measure or system they come up with, it won't change that, and they'll demand yet another concession.

In the progressive orthodoxy, merely observing that some distribution isn't independent of gender or ethnicity is necessary and sufficient proof of discrimination, and sufficient justification for a power grab too.

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

#862

Post by boomlinde »

jakeogh wrote: post #840
boomlinde wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reductio ad absurdum is useful. Maybe, but in this case I don't think that it was for the reasons that I've previously stated. > Sounds like you agree. What makes it sound like I agree? The only opinions I've divulged are on the quality of the post as an entry to the debate. > Idk why label it a slippery slope, it's pretty cut and dry. Please offer an opinion on whether its use was legitimate and based on a reasona…

It's useful independent of whether the comment is sarcastically enthusiastic , hyperbolic , vague or bitter . Your actual objection seems to be that it's hypothetical when in fact that's the point of the technique. I think you can understand parent. Why claim a simpler non-sarcastic example on how honest test scores matter was somehow not made?

> It's useful independent of whether the comment is sarcastically enthusiastic, hyperbolic, vague or bitter.

You can say that, but until you've actually offered an argument that supports your conclusion I have no reason to reconsider my view. There's no question IMO that a sentiment can be useful while being sarcastic, hyperbolic, vague or bitter. I just don't believe that this one was, for the reasons I've previously stated.

> Your actual objection seems to be that it's hypothetical when in fact that's the point of the technique.

No, my objection is that it is hypothetical without reasoning for how the actual matter at hand could form a basis for the hypothesis. To say that because SAT scores are adjusted for adversity, "adversity scores should also be counted towards recruitment in elite military units, selection for senior military leadership and all significant promotions" begs the question: why? The post doesn't answer that question.

> Why claim a simpler non-sarcastic example on how honest test scores matter was somehow not made?

I haven't. Plenty of users have written simpler, non-sarcastic examples on how honest test scores matter. I acknowledged this already, and I'm not sure why you'd think otherwise.

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

#863

Post by indrax »

bloaf wrote: post #635
indrax wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is incorrect. What would "well prepared" mean here anyway?

Probably something along the lines of: Without accommodation, being able to learn, participate, and demonstrate competency in a series of courses which presume a student's mastery of information presented through secondary education.

Ok. If we take that definition, is there any reason a test shouldn't consider whether a student had a very good school and learned half of what they were given, or a very poor school and learned everything they were exposed to? (a contrived case, of course)

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

#864

Post by learc83 »

lenkite wrote: post #693
learc83 wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equal opportunity vs equal outcome is just a matter of perspective. If we take the desired outcome as can complete college then both proposals are attempting to provide equal opportunity. Declaring that one denigrates people while the other doesn't based solely on outcome vs opportunity requires arbitrarily picking an observation point that supports your view.

From any remotely objective view-point, a policy that chooses to add a hidden adversity score based on poverty, single-parenting and perceived hardship to a test that is designed as a measure of your scholastic ability is most certainly denigrating to folks who have chosen to lift themselves out of that adversity through experience of great adversity! A policy that gives 5K to low-income families to allow their child…

Yes, of course you can because the distinction is arbitrary. What people decide to think of as outcome vs opportunity tends to reflect the distinction that benefits them the most.

Even the definition of merit and earned achievement is largely arbitrary. I'm successful because of the way I was created and raised. It's not a personal accomplishment.

Hard work should be rewarded because it's a basically useful for society to do so, not because it's some kind of absolute moral imperative.

To the extent that this proposal ceases to award hard work, from a societal perspective, it's gone too far. However it doesn't come close to doing that.

Looking at the metrics they're using, the only likely widescale impact on behavior is that people are less likely to move to rich neighborhoods with high scoring schools. I don't see this as a problem.

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

#865

Post by selimthegrim »

pacala wrote: post #264
tlb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Past adversity is in the past. So if someone grew up in a poor environment but you're thinking of admitting them to a good college on full scholarship, they'll soon be progressing at the rate they're capable of without the adversity. So the best predictor of future success in a good environment probably does include a correction for past adversity.

How does one determine how large the correction should be? Since the system is all opaque and political, what prevents one from setting a correction factor of 10x, making sure no child of --bourgeois-- middle-class parents will ever set foot in an university? Such a policy was implemented in Eastern Europe under occupation by Stalin's armies in the aftermath of WWII. The economic and social results became quite appar…

What’s the evidence linking the two?

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

#866

Post by remote_phone »

jachee wrote: post #729
snaggletooth wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if you make $125k/yr and I make $75k/yr, equality can only exist if you give me 25k? Should America all just average our salaries and call it a day?

If I made $125k a year, that'd be almost double my current salary. I could spare the $25k, then, if you were struggling. Could you do the same in the reverse situation?

Do you donate your extra money to charity or do you save some for your future? If you have the privilege of being able to save some money for your future, shame on you! There are people starving and you’re amassing your wealth?

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

#867

Post by strikelaserclaw »

sjy wrote: post #221
remote_phone wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already talked to my wife about this. I would retire, we would divorce, and I would rent a shitty apartment in East Palo Alto all the while living in our house. If they think they can boil my kids into a single number without bothering to find the context of who my kids are then I will game it to as much as possible. I don’t know why my family should be punished because my wife and I worked our asses off to get ahe…

Choosing to get a fake divorce so that you can game the system as much as possible isn't punishment; it's probably fraud. You could also choose to relax and let your children enjoy all the other benefits of a great upbringing, and accept that "the children of hardworking parents should be more likely to be admitted" isn't a design goal of the admissions system.

If this guy is going to insane lengths like this, he is probably gaming the system in other ways anyway.

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

#868

Post by strikelaserclaw »

remote_phone wrote: post #478
jachee wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is giving underprivileged people a leg up "punishing" anyone? Privileged people need to start recognizing their inherent pre-rigging of the system. For those in power, equality feels like oppression.

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…

Again, i think this is more like the inner city kid who gets a 700 on the SAT math section vs a privileged kid who gets an 800. They aren't letting in talent less hacks just cause they are poor.

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

#869

Post by xhkkffbf »

droithomme wrote: post #199
BonesJustice wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might have to do with wanting to avoid people trying to game the system? Not that I expect the shroud of secrecy to actually mitigate that problem.

The purpose of this sort of secrecy is to avoid people seeing how the system is gamed against them.

You seem to think that the system will be used to boost kids with high adversity scores. Many colleges desperately want kids who will pay full tuition. But they also want to claim they're "need blind." Voila. The "adversity" score tells them whether the kids came from a rich neighborhood.

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

#870

Post by kaitai »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #765
kaitai wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It always gets ugly. I had a (well-off, white) friend use another friend's address to get into the high school I went to. He ended up at Princeton so I guess it worked well for him. No one did anything about it. The case in 2011 where an Ohio woman (Kelley Williams-Bolar) was sentenced to a short jail sentence and 3 years probation and asked to pay $30000 to the school because she did the same thing has come up in th…

Felicity Huffman is going to go to jail for much longer than Kelley Williams-Bolar (9 days), even though she is rich, white, and has great lawyers.

And there's been media discussion of why her husband hasn't been charged, despite being on the phone calls & verbally approving the crime!
Post reply on HN