3 ms·

SAT's are not used universally, nor are they the only factor in determining acceptance when they are used. Nor SHOULD they be. Whatever the case, it is not sur

SAT's are not used universally, nor are they the only factor in determining acceptance when they are used. Nor SHOULD they be. Whatever the case, it is not surprising that sketchy cram schools are cheating.

threatofrain 11y ago
Whatever is the most performant set of predictive instruments should be used as a factor for acceptance for colleges seeking to optimize on whatever they feel are the "best" students. College essays? Sure, if the instrument is performant. SAT II's? Sure, if the instrument is performant. Grades? Sure, if the instrument is performant. Or extra-curriculars, or whatever.
- crispyambulance 11y ago
  "Whatever" is certainly the case. College admissions at many of the better schools don't simply try to get "all the best" students that they can. They look to balance many factors, including admitting some fraction of students who have connections or can pay full tuition, including taking a risk on some students who would otherwise not be admitted but show some promise, including throttling-down the acceptance of over-represented groups. This is a fact. "predictive performant instruments" sure sounds very rigorous and objective, but you're talking about young people who are undergoing a lot of change. They're moving targets and predicting future performance based on one test only goes so far. A test like the SAT is always going to be a blunt instrument as is any singular factor. Admissions officers recognize this.
  - superuser2 11y ago
    >or can pay full tuition Can you name some "better schools" whose admissions are not need-blind? My understanding is that this is pretty much universal among prestigious schools.
    - crispyambulance 11y ago
      Yes, but my knowledge of this comes from having an admissions officer as a friend, so I am NOT going to name a few highly regarded elite schools which do this. Universities will certainly not publicly announce that they admit some students strictly because of connections or funding. Yet it happens... children of prominent alumni gain admittance with relatively lackluster grades, some numbers of foreign students which are required to pay full tuition get admitted even though they're not quite up to par with the other students. There's always plausible deniability, they're not going to admit idiots and at the same time many stellar students get admitted with no regard to need. Admissions is not a "pure" meritocracy, nor is it the opposite.

threatofrain 11y ago

Whatever is the most performant set of predictive instruments should be used as a factor for acceptance for colleges seeking to optimize on whatever they feel are the "best" students. College essays? Sure, if the instrument is performant. SAT II's? Sure, if the instrument is performant. Grades? Sure, if the instrument is performant. Or extra-curriculars, or whatever.

crispyambulance 11y ago
"Whatever" is certainly the case. College admissions at many of the better schools don't simply try to get "all the best" students that they can. They look to balance many factors, including admitting some fraction of students who have connections or can pay full tuition, including taking a risk on some students who would otherwise not be admitted but show some promise, including throttling-down the acceptance of over-represented groups. This is a fact. "predictive performant instruments" sure sounds very rigorous and objective, but you're talking about young people who are undergoing a lot of change. They're moving targets and predicting future performance based on one test only goes so far. A test like the SAT is always going to be a blunt instrument as is any singular factor. Admissions officers recognize this.
- superuser2 11y ago
  >or can pay full tuition Can you name some "better schools" whose admissions are not need-blind? My understanding is that this is pretty much universal among prestigious schools.
  - crispyambulance 11y ago
    Yes, but my knowledge of this comes from having an admissions officer as a friend, so I am NOT going to name a few highly regarded elite schools which do this. Universities will certainly not publicly announce that they admit some students strictly because of connections or funding. Yet it happens... children of prominent alumni gain admittance with relatively lackluster grades, some numbers of foreign students which are required to pay full tuition get admitted even though they're not quite up to par with the other students. There's always plausible deniability, they're not going to admit idiots and at the same time many stellar students get admitted with no regard to need. Admissions is not a "pure" meritocracy, nor is it the opposite.