Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief • Hacker News Board

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#91

Post by alphanullmeric » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:41 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #88

alphanullmeric wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you like to provide an example then? Government inequality please, I’m not interested in hearing why you believe a private party should be obligated to give you anything.

It’s not about being obligated or private parties. It’s just simply pointing out that not everyone has equal opportunity. You can start with access to prenatal health care, which literally starts before birth. And then you can find inequality of opportunity all the way up through life — from differences in water quality, school quality, access to money through inequality in banking access, access to high quality food…

Like I said, I’m not interested in hearing why you believe other individuals should be forced to pay more money to things that would benefit you. Do you have any examples of government inequality? For instance, does the law require that a white student with the same SAT as a black student be prioritized?

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#92

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:41 PM UTC

civilized wrote: post #28

nicoburns wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where you go to school still greatly affects how well you are likely to do on standardised tests. Better schools can easily bump students up 2 or 3 grades compared to poorer schools. To some extent this will also improve students’ ability to complete degree courses, but there’s also a great extent to which this is just teaching students how to pass standardised tests well. It’s true that truly excellent students will…

You seem to be saying that "better schools" (mostly) don't actually select or train better students, but (mostly) merely train them to pass standardized tests better. Is there any evidence or reason to believe this?

[deleted]

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#93

Post by kenjackson » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:41 PM UTC

standy17817 wrote: post #82

kenjackson wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide references for this story?

It was a Supreme Court case, Griggs vs Duke Power, in 1970. Since then, employers cannot use IQ tests or standardized tests, since they were deemed discriminatory against minorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co .

This case says something different though. It says you can’t use a test that doesn’t relate to the job, regardless of if there’s intent to discriminate or not.

A standardized test that tests your ability to do the job is still allowable — presumably even if minorities fare worse on it.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#94

Post by someguydave » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:42 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #67

civilized wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Standardized tests are designed to be as non-gameable as possible. They're definitely less gameable than the other admissions criteria still used in elite colleges: admissions essays, playing obscure sports, fancy extracurricular experiences, etc. Most studies find SAT prep confers very limited benefits to the average person. Having an essay essentially written for you by an expensive consultant with contacts in admi…

The SAT is way more gameable than the College Board would have you believe. Most coaching is not very effective, but there is a group that is very effective. It’s almost by design that they aren’t very popular. That said it is less gameable than most of the rest of the process. Family wealth and income are probably less gameable, but many schools are need blind.

Can you link published research indicating that you can increase SAT scores through training? The research I have read says the opposite.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#95

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:43 PM UTC

lumb63 wrote: post #30

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while a lot of the softer stuff like interviews and letters of recommendation were pretty close to worthless It’s telling we’re seeing testing attacked while these are preserved.

It’s not a mistake, that’s for sure. I’ll be more blunt since a lot of other comments in this thread beat around the bush: higher education institutes are removing objective admissions criteria so that they can admit less qualified minorities on subjective grounds.

[deleted]

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#96

Post by bradleyjg » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:46 PM UTC

mrangle wrote: post #66

PaulHoule wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the other way around. It helps to have some familiarity with the test, so test prep has some value, but some rich kids can’t test their way out of a paper bag. The one thing they could do is hire a ringer to take the test for them, otherwise it is a valuable form of downward mobility which presents a “barrier” to them hoarding opportunity from someone more able.

There's virtually no such thing as ringers taking tests. The majority of rich kids, whose parents are serious about college, are tracked through prep schools beginning with kindergarten. Its more rare than not that such a kid underperforms enough to be excluded from elite University admission. Especially once one includes the many elite liberal arts colleges that are generally off of the radar of poors. I do agree ab…

Don’t forget the off the chart rates of testing accommodations for rich kids vs everyone else.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#97

Post by civilized » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:49 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #90

civilized wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying there is some particular training program that increases scores much more than the 30-90 points claimed by various studies?

Yes. And I’m going to be coy and not tell you much about it. So you’re right to be skeptical. In a few years I’ll speak more freely on it.

Skeptical is putting it mildly. I'd give you better chances of having a secret proof of the Riemann Hypothesis than producing miracle educational results at scale (even if it is just on a standardized test).

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#98

Post by zozbot234 » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:50 PM UTC

jeffrallen wrote: post #75

I live in a society with free education for all, up to and including university. To make that possible, there are a limited number of seats, and the number is based on the needs of society, and on our government's budget. The seats are allocated based on testing, but there are multiple ways to "test into" a seat, i.e. "you missed it this time, but go do another two years of pre-university and you might get in later".…

If there's a limited number of seats, it's not "free for all". (Of course, there's no way around inherent class size limits under any system, other than MOOC's which are quite different from actual real-world college classes.)

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#99

Post by mrangle » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:50 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #18

sandworm101 wrote: post #5

Standardized tests remain the only criteria totally in the control of the student. You can study for them and objectively do better, become a better applicant. Everthing else is either circumstantial or based in the opinion of others, mostly highschool teachers. If i had to rely on my highschool teachers' opinion of me i would not have ever gone to university let alone have won scholarships. Standardized testing allo…

Where you go to school still greatly affects how well you are likely to do on standardised tests. Better schools can easily bump students up 2 or 3 grades compared to poorer schools. To some extent this will also improve students’ ability to complete degree courses, but there’s also a great extent to which this is just teaching students how to pass standardised tests well. It’s true that truly excellent students will…

With all due respect, that's not right. Any student attending a prep school from kindergarten, or otherwise very early, will have their development accelerated as compared to a child who attends an average school. The effect compounds with each year.

This doesn't somewhat improve college performance. It creates a markedly different brain and habits. An effect that declines as entrance into such a school system becomes later. Middle school being exceptionally late. High school being so late so as to have a marginal effect if any. Kindergarten being optimal.

Prep schools, generally speaking, only give basic test instruction for college entrance exams. Other standardized testing is the same or even less than normal schools. Cram-course style instruction is generally private and paid for privately by any given family. In my experience, the vast majority of prep school students don't seek it. This is in the United States.

Re: Dropping the SAT requirement is a luxury belief

#100

Post by ProjectArcturis » Sun, Mar 05, 2023, 2:50 PM UTC

djaouen wrote: post #2

The only reason I was able to break into programming was because of high standardized test scores. The SAT and others like it really are a great equalizer. Dropping the requirement is a shame.

They're not banning it, it's just no longer a requirement. You could still have benefited.