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

Reinstating our SAT/ACT requirement for future admissions cycles

mitadmissions.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

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

#861

Post by hacym »

agar wrote: post #723
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…

This thread is filled with people arguing false dichotomies: "test scores" vs. "fancy extra-curriculars" or "rich experiences" vs. "working class experiences." I recently saw one child into college, and have another on the way. I've spoken to many admissions officers, counselors, and similar folks making admissions choices for public and private universities. To a one, they all claim to be looking for two things: (1)…

High level public institutions get tens of thousands of applicants. I can almost assure you that what you’re describing is a wonderland that doesn’t exist in all but the smallest schools that can take time to review applicants on the whole. Most schools can barely weed through the applicants based on standardized measures (GPA, SAT/ACT, coursework). The feel good stuff likely only shines in essays, but very little prestige is going to be given to someone that wrote about working a summer job to pay for school, even if that’s unfortunate for the student.

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

#862

Post by [deleted] »

weekendmodder wrote: post #796
MichaelApproved wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who claim “ standardized test is systematic racism ” are not necessarily the same people who think “ asian americans being discriminated at ivy leagues even with good standardized test score is not seen as systematic racism. ” You are taking two different points of views which are made by two different groups, reducing their arguments down to practically nothing, and pretending they’re being made by the same g…

You must write stack overflow responses. Not addressing the root questions, just insult the question and the asker.

[deleted]

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

#863

Post by hacym »

tcmart14 wrote: post #839
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…

I'm not against standardized tests. What I am against is a test ran by a private company as a barrier of entry into a public institution. Private schools who want to require SAT/ACT, fine, they are private institutions, I see no issue them requiring a test administered by a private company. University of North Carolina, eh, can't we have a test ran by a public institution as a barrier of entry into a public instituti…

I can see this argument. You’d also hope that graduation from one of our high schools and the motivation to apply was enough to demonstrate preparedness for college. While private run tests have their drawbacks, a publicly run exam has its own, and we have examples of that too. It isn’t easy to fix unfortunately.

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

#864

Post by charlieyu1 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #834
charlieyu1 wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this benefit the rich kids who can spend thousands of dollars per year to hire someone to plan a good resume for them

If wealth didn't incur some advantages, no one would bother to seek it. I don't know how to fix that fundamental aspect of reality, or indeed if it should be fixed. Any ideas?

Different kinds of advantage. Yes wealth can bring you all sorts of luxury. But it is a bad idea to close the doors to the poor, especially essentials like education.

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

#865

Post by yes_really »

agar wrote: post #723
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…

This thread is filled with people arguing false dichotomies: "test scores" vs. "fancy extra-curriculars" or "rich experiences" vs. "working class experiences." I recently saw one child into college, and have another on the way. I've spoken to many admissions officers, counselors, and similar folks making admissions choices for public and private universities. To a one, they all claim to be looking for two things: (1)…

> Some of the least interesting students are "box checkers" who have a bunch of disconnected extra-curriculars that don't show passion, direction, or a proclivity towards success. If a student defines "success" as "getting into college," then what will they do once they get there? Probably flounder.

Yet if a student defines "success" as "playing a musical instrument really well" you'll think that he is well-rounded and deserves to get admitted.

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

#866

Post by tonyhan »

Well, in Canada we don’t have standardized exam like ACT and SAT but we do have provincial exams that account for 20% of your grade in major courses from Gr 10 to 12.

I didn’t do fancy extra curriculars. I merely joined student council to organize events, started an announcement club (just me reading a school events over the PA), and didn’t do any sports (but did music and band). None of these are costly.

I think the truth is you need to look at a diverse rage of factors. If someone is not into sports, let’s look at what else they did. If grades are high, why do they need to engage in other extracurricular?

Obviously, the motive is different. Students want education to find what they want to do or gain skills, reps and network to find a job that pays descent.

Universities however look at other criteria - % alumni finding a job, average alumni pay, etc.

What we do should ultimately help the students achieve what they want while balancing the motives for universities.

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

#867

Post by yes_really »

aj7 wrote: post #613
davesque wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

No no no. The thesis topics are in graduate schools are more cutting edge, and the opportunity to interact with real science as an undergraduate are invaluable. I would tend to agree that excelling at a second tier university with a comprehensive program is an acceptable start. It generally gets you to a higher level. Competitiveness is about speed. Anyone can look something up. It’s about knowing things right off th…

Chinese leaders were the ones that let COVID leak out of the lab and censored the doctors that tried to warn the population.

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

#868

Post by abecedarius »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #693
opportune wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO there is a difference between gaming a test and just getting better at what a test means to cover. For example, programs like Kumon allow students to learn math more rigorously/at a higher level than what they may get exposed to in a classroom. That doesn’t mean they’re gaming the test, they’re just getting a better education. While it’s perhaps unfair that some students don’t get this opportunity, I don’t think…

That would be 30 per category, so 60 points. Which can definitely be the difference between a top university considerign an applicant or throwing the app away. Back in my day when SAT's were 2400, I heard the swing being a difference of 100 points. Since reverting back to 1600 a 60 point swings sounds proportionately similar to 13 years ago. Anyways, I think when people mean "gaming the system", they mean test prep c…

Don't you get the majority of the benefit of specific test prep by running through a couple of sample tests from a guidebook, which you can get from a public library? (I'd say most of the benefit, in my case, but probably shouldn't generalize that far.)

I can imagine a longer test prep class that was really more like general math tutoring could make a bigger difference, a la Bloom's 2-sigma problem.

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

#869

Post by vadym909 »

welshwelsh wrote: post #847
thedstrat wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are intelligent people though that don't do well on standardized tests (or at least don't get top tier results). I agree that standardized testing is a good metric to get a general idea of aptitude, but I think it hugely fails in appreciating people who are able to solve 'non-standardized' problems. And those are actually the people who should be placed in top institutions

The SAT measures the two skills colleges care most about: reading and math. Reading is the most important part. Your score on this section is determined by how much time you spend reading. A student who reads for an hour a day will get a top score, while a student who doesn't read at home will get a low score. Colleges require students to be capable of reading for long periods of time, and the SAT is a great way of f…

Is it the literal act of reading or being exposed to language? What if kids watch shows on TV and it exposes them as much to stories, communications, language?

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

#870

Post by fsckboy »

umvi wrote: post #811
fsckboy wrote: post #765

as an MIT alum, a wealthy one who thought he would leave his fortune to MIT, I applaud this move, but it doesn't get me back to giving. MIT shouldn't have stopped requiring the tests in the first place, shouldn't have participated in that anti-intellectual "shut down tech" day or whatever that was, and shouldn't have done a dozen other things like cancel speakers to bow to a woke mob. MIT needs to sign up to the Chic…

Using IQ as the sole metric for intelligence is bogus though, in my opinion. Hard working "low IQ" slow learners beat mentally fragile or lazy "high IQ" quick learners 9 times out of 10 in my book. Low(er) IQ people can still master advanced sciences, it just takes them longer to do so. Standardized tests filter for the quickest learners who can think the fastest but they don't do as well filtering for mental fortitu…

I didn't base what I wrote on my opinion or my personal experience, it's published peer reviewed science. The notion that many psychologists over many decades who have devoted their careers attempting together to understand/explain/theorize about the cleverness that sets us apart from the other apes would have somehow failed to stumble upon your insights seems fanciful.
Post reply on HN