53 ms·

This recent trend of eliminating the SAT/ACT reads to me like: “Let’s eliminate these measures that allow high performing students to objectively differentiate

This recent trend of eliminating the SAT/ACT reads to me like: “Let’s eliminate these measures that allow high performing students to objectively differentiate themselves, in favor of a more opaque admissions process where we can implement discriminatory policies without scrutiny.”

DethNinja 6y ago
I’m originally from a third world country and those practices look unbelievably awful to me. If this happened at a corrupt country, you can bet that university would be full of students that entered there just by nepotism, it is also very effective for discriminating against minorities. I get that USA isn’t as corrupt as many of the third world countries but it is going there with slow and steady steps, removing SAT scores might make USA lose it’s scientific status in near future.
mrlala 6y ago
>allow high performing students to objectively differentiate themselves Except the argument by people is it's NOT objective. I think the argument goes something like this: rich kid gets full time tutor privately or through school and is able to do significantly better on the SAT/ACT because they have specifically prepared for it. It doesn't mean they are smarter, or even a better student. It means they have been prepped better for it than their peers that don't have the same luxuries. If 95% of the time a student scores higher after taking an expensive prep course, does that mean scoring higher really means much? Especially with SO many people taking the test, that little bit makes a difference where are you on the curve.. perhaps people are thinking that the kids whose parents can afford the time and money to give them a slightly advantage on the test doesn't translate into that person being a better student.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  This is a myth. Almost nobody, even among "rich kids", gets a full time tutor for the SAT/ACT. Most just use the same cheap tools everyone else does - a Barron's test prep book.
ylem 6y ago
Isn't this a one year experiment due to Covid?

DethNinja 6y ago

I’m originally from a third world country and those practices look unbelievably awful to me. If this happened at a corrupt country, you can bet that university would be full of students that entered there just by nepotism, it is also very effective for discriminating against minorities. I get that USA isn’t as corrupt as many of the third world countries but it is going there with slow and steady steps, removing SAT scores might make USA lose it’s scientific status in near future.

mrlala 6y ago

>allow high performing students to objectively differentiate themselves Except the argument by people is it's NOT objective. I think the argument goes something like this: rich kid gets full time tutor privately or through school and is able to do significantly better on the SAT/ACT because they have specifically prepared for it. It doesn't mean they are smarter, or even a better student. It means they have been prepped better for it than their peers that don't have the same luxuries. If 95% of the time a student scores higher after taking an expensive prep course, does that mean scoring higher really means much? Especially with SO many people taking the test, that little bit makes a difference where are you on the curve.. perhaps people are thinking that the kids whose parents can afford the time and money to give them a slightly advantage on the test doesn't translate into that person being a better student.

throwawaysea 6y ago
This is a myth. Almost nobody, even among "rich kids", gets a full time tutor for the SAT/ACT. Most just use the same cheap tools everyone else does - a Barron's test prep book.

ylem 6y ago

Isn't this a one year experiment due to Covid?