What could POSSIBLY go wrong here:
- Thread starter stormingnorm
- Start date
I don’t know, not as many less intelligent, mostly white students don’t get into some schools over more intelligent, mostly minority students who grew up in a substandard school district but are capable of doing the work in college?
I don't know, perhaps less intelligent minority kids get into some schools over more intelligent white kids who are "capable of doing the work in college."I don’t know, not as many less intelligent, mostly white students don’t get into some schools over more intelligent, mostly minority students who grew up in a substandard school district but are capable of doing the work in college?
.Colleges are so clandestine about their admissions process already and this looks like one more layer of obfuscation.
Conceptually it’s not a bad idea as it would theoretically provide an assist to underprivileged kids from substandard neighborhoods. In actuality the inevitable inclusion of outdated, incomplete or falsified data would probably make this plan as statically accurate or inaccurate as any other metric now in use. That being said, I must admit that I’ve never been a huge fan of social engineering by eggheads.
Many of these kids, minority or “white privileged “ would do themselves a big favor by studying employee/worker shortage trends, enroll in a good technical school and forgo the whole college scam. They would be working at decent paying jobs earlier and would not have massive debt to pay off.
In fairness, though, the entire concept of standardized testing in the US is an example of social engineering by eggheads: http://www.nea.org//home/73288.htm
on one hand your right, why not be a plumber, electrician, carpenter etc? They make good money, and probably no debt. I have friends that have done that, the only problem I see is, by 60 they are all broken down, have all kinds of different health issues from heart to knees to lungs etc. Pick your poison I guess.
It’s not like they only offer admission to the kids with the top SAT scores as it is. There are already other factors sometimes considered, it’s just another data point.
I guess it helps level the playing field if you don’t have $500K and a fake water polo background.
Bear with me as it's been almost 50 years since I took the SATs but how do they know what high school you go to? Does the student enter that information? Is it checked? Otherwise, I'm envisioning Felicity Huffman telling her kid to enter Crenshaw High in that section.
And just because you can get a job doesn’t mean you want to do it for the rest of your life. Young adults can’t always look at what gets them an immediate job as an answer because who wants to be miserable doing a crap job for the whole life regardless of what it pays?
Well, for one, I believe you still take the SAT’s st your school, and you have to sign-up at your school. Although maybe that’s changed.
Absolutely agree with this.
I think its time we pull back on the "everyone must attend college" mantra.
pretty sure your school has a a code you enter, also pretty sure not every school has the SAT, so you may have to go to a neighboring school. I did.
Nope. My daughter just took the SAT at a neighboring school and had several schools to choose from. And she signed up totally online, completely separate from her school.
I took mine in 1980 and I had to take mine at the bigger HS in the area. Maybe because the HS I went to was on the smaller side (I think we had 97 in our graduating class)?
I love it, just a matter of time until the northern latitude score is subtracted from 40 times or the 100 m. Maybe this Fish guy you guys talk about will get a bump with a whiteness score too? Also, Bragalone should make an NFL roster after the changes.
Why consider anything but a person's skin color and where they are from? Character, ability, hard work and the like are all over-rated. A person's real measure is their skin color and where they grew up. MLK? He was like the opposite of woke. Maximizing performance is only for pro sports teams. It's not really important anywhere else.
Why consider anything but a person's skin color and where they are from? Character, ability, hard work and the like are all over-rated. A person's real measure is their skin color and where they grew up. MLK? He was like the opposite of woke. Maximizing performance is only for pro sports teams. It's not really important anywhere else.
This could be a big win for troubled neighborhoods. Think of all the wealthy people with mediocre kids moving into distressed neighborhoods to give their kid a boost in their SAT scores.
or said wealthy person buying a house in that neighborhood and using that as their address of record.
Excellent plan, then they could subdivide and move 4 or 5 low income families into the building, charge an outrageous rental and use the profits to pay for their kids tuition without touching their personal savings accounts. I love the ripple effect.
An adversity score undercuts the whole point of a test; a standardized test gives a basic, simplistic but somewhat useful measure of academic achievement. If you have a 36 ACT, you are legitimately smart. If you have a 12 ACT, you have no business going to college.
Colleges, can and should, apply real, meaningful adversity components into their admissions. (With the strong Lefty bent of universities unlikely that it will be done competently or fairly, but it should be done competently and fairly)
Of course, the real reason for the adversity score is to increase minority admissions. Colleges are already doing this, by, for instance, admitting Black students with lower scores. See https://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/ No point to having it as a component of a test.
Colleges, can and should, apply real, meaningful adversity components into their admissions. (With the strong Lefty bent of universities unlikely that it will be done competently or fairly, but it should be done competently and fairly)
Of course, the real reason for the adversity score is to increase minority admissions. Colleges are already doing this, by, for instance, admitting Black students with lower scores. See https://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/ No point to having it as a component of a test.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/us/sat-adversity-score.html
The SAT, the college entrance test taken by about two million students a year, is adding an “adversity score” to the test results that is intended to help admissions officers account for factors like educational or socioeconomic disadvantage that may depress students’ scores, the College Board, the company that administers the test, said Thursday.
The adversity score would be a number between 1 and 100, with an average student receiving a 50. It would be calculated using 15 factors, like the relative quality of the student’s high school and the crime rate and poverty level of the student’s home neighborhood. The score would not be reported to the student, only to college officials.
The SAT, the college entrance test taken by about two million students a year, is adding an “adversity score” to the test results that is intended to help admissions officers account for factors like educational or socioeconomic disadvantage that may depress students’ scores, the College Board, the company that administers the test, said Thursday.
The adversity score would be a number between 1 and 100, with an average student receiving a 50. It would be calculated using 15 factors, like the relative quality of the student’s high school and the crime rate and poverty level of the student’s home neighborhood. The score would not be reported to the student, only to college officials.
It sounds like a good idea in principle but sometimes good ideas in principle don't work well in practice.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
D'oh - didn't see that. Mea culpa
Meh, sluggo felt the need to chime in when I made a similar post not long after norm's (noting I actually used an FC). That said, unless you always read everything norm posts, why would you know that a thread titled 'What could POSSIBLY go wrong?' has anything at all to do with this issue?
Yeah, when I saw that title I thought that Norm had spotted Fats hightailin' it to the men's room after over-indulging in the new formulation of onion dip.
Common sense says the thread title should summarize the content. Some think sensationalism is the better way to go.
does spending too much time on this board allow me to apply for a better "adversity score" at work?
As far as universities, I have no expectation something like this would work as advertised.It’s not like they only offer admission to the kids with the top SAT scores as it is. There are already other factors sometimes considered, it’s just another data point.
I guess it helps level the playing field if you don’t have $500K and a fake water polo background.
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Penn State commit visting Ohio State this weekend- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-
