6 ms·

As an ancedote, I was told by my low income peer group that you get 600 points just for filling out your name on the SAT and that 800 points could get you into

As an ancedote, I was told by my low income peer group that you get 600 points just for filling out your name on the SAT and that 800 points could get you into a great school like MIT. So I assumed it was a pass/fail exam in a sense and left early during the verbal part because I found it condescending and boring. Before the exam, I couldn't understand why the higher income kids were paying for SAT training classes. What is the point of scoring 1600 if 800 could get you in the "best" school. It would have interfered with my after school job anyway. To add further, I thought MIT was just DeVry for rich people but otherwise equivalent and that only black kids get scholarships (ironic since I am Latino). Are things different now ? Are most kids from lower socio-economic backgrounds still clueless about the college admissions process, the difference between colleges, and scholarships. It seems like that is the part that needs to be fixed and eliminating SATs is shortsighted.

crackercrews 5y ago
You get 200 points per section automatically. [1] And to get into MIT you'd need at least 1,000 points, no matter your race. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT
- edflsafoiewq 5y ago
  Why does it have such a weird score range?
  - xadhominemx 5y ago
    You get negative points for answering incorrectly, to disincentivize blind guessing.
    - crackercrews 5y ago
      I believe it doesn't disincentivize blind guessing. It just counteracts it. If you can eliminate one answer you should guess. Even if you can't eliminate an answer you break even.
      - relaxing 5y ago
        That wouldn’t be blind.
    - AnnikaL 5y ago
      The SAT no longer penalizes guessing (i.e. incorrect answers).[0] [0] - https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/sat/whats-on-the-test/structure https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/sat/whats-on-the-test/stru...
      - xadhominemx 5y ago
        Interesting, thank you
- nostrademons 5y ago
  800 points on one section will get you into MIT, as that's a perfect score. 1000 on combined seems very unlikely to get you into SAT; the 25th percentile is 1500. https://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/MIT-SAT-scores-GPA https://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/MIT-SAT-scores-GP...
  - crackercrews 5y ago
    I was replying to a comment indicating that URMs can get in with extremely low scores. My point is that they can get in with somewhat lower scores. But they still have to clear a much higher threshold than 800 combined.
- judge2020 5y ago
  Massachusetts Institute of Technology/Typical SAT scores Reading and Writing 730-780, Math 780-800
tootie 5y ago
I think this is a real fundamental problem and something that seems to easy to fix. People just don't know how the other half live. There's a persistent belief that rich people and poor people are like two different species. I got a CS degree from a pretty good school but it was almost pure luck. My high school had programming classes and I enjoyed them. I didn't realize what I was setting myself up for.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > There's a persistent belief that rich people and poor people are like two different species. I got a CS degree from a pretty good school but it was almost pure luck. My high school had programming classes and I enjoyed them. When Covid hit, schools in poor communities tried to implement distance learning and discovered that only half (for example, in one city which I don't remember) of families had a desktop or laptop for the student to use - probably those kids aren't going to become programmers. Programming classes are non-existent, at least based on limited knowledge - seriously, look up the programming classes in a nearby poor school district.
renewiltord 5y ago
Out of curiosity, where did the “leave early” belief come from in your opinion? In my community, leaving early would have been considered embarrassing and equivalent to conceding inability, and I fail to be but a representative member - but for you it was actually embarrassing to continue (the opposite).
yardie 5y ago
I grew up a low income student as well but why kind of bullshit were they feeding you? My athlete friends were well aware you needed a 950 for any kind of NCAA consideration. It didn’t matter how good your grades or athleticism if you couldn’t pass that hurdle you were relegated to juco. If anything most of the high school counselors in predominantly poor and black schools just don’t push very hard. They would tell you MIT was too far of a reach. They would tell you the best you could hope for was a private local, community college, or public state university. Who would ever consider Devry and MIT as equivalent?
- wolverine876 5y ago
  It would be very interesting to hear your personal experience. But how can you make general statements about all poor schools?
  - brigandish 5y ago
    He's responding to an anecdote - one that sounds absurd, by the way - so I would say that responding with an anecdote is fine, especially one that actually sounds realistic. Let's hear some anecdotes about being pushed hard in schools based in poor areas before dismissing it.
    - sometimeshuman 5y ago
      "sounds absurd, by the way".. that perhaps explains all the downvotes. One of the surprises about getting older is that stories from your youth sound more and more absurd with time. I didn't grow up with the Internet and the "MIT whiz kid" wasn't common in movies/shows until the mid 90's and ever after. What was a thing during my high school days were the relentless TV commercials for tech schools masquerading as advanced degree institutions. Who lies on HN about a personal story BTW ? What would be the point.
      - wolverine876 5y ago
        > that perhaps explains all the downvotes The downvotes are the aggressive reactionary tide through HN, that rises and falls. Your personal observation suggests that some 'progressive' action might be valuable, that there's a systemic problem, and therefore it is shut down. Don't stop telling it please. We need more voices from the real world here.
wolverine876 5y ago
> Are most kids from lower socio-economic backgrounds still clueless about the college admissions process, the difference between colleges, and scholarships. It seems like that is the part that needs to be fixed There's been a lot of research and work on that, though I don't know what progress has been made. You can find NY Times articles from a few years ago. > eliminating SATs is shortsighted Why does the above make SATs any better? They don't predict college outcomes, and they are structured and written in ways that favor wealth, thus providing bad data on students (other than their wealth). Why use them?
chaps 5y ago
I grew up in lower socioeconomic status and can confirm that the university admissions process was never really taught to us in any meaningful way. Teachers never talked about it, my parents never talked about it, counselors didn't talk about it, etc. Our education was built around testing because if our school got bad testing, then the school would lose funding. Our education was damaged as a result, every teacher talked about it as an awful system, and the kids who did well in testing had enough money to pay for tutors, ie they were already advantaged Getting rid of SATs from my perspective sounds like a fantastic idea.
- crackercrews 5y ago
  > Our education was built around testing because if our school got bad testing, then the school would lose funding. > Getting rid of SATs from my perspective sounds like a fantastic idea. There are two types of standardized tests. The first kind you reference measures the school. They are not used for college admissions. They can affect school funding. The second type of test measures the student. Sometimes a school will report those numbers. But they do not affect the funding a school gets. Getting rid of the SAT would have zero effect on contingent funding for schools.
  - chaps 5y ago
    Hm, nah. Consider this: if the schools weren't dependent on the test scores, then they could use that same energy-for-testing to teach their students methods for improving their SAT scores. I genuinely doubt they'll switch energy, but the fact remains that the requirement to game a test-well-or-lose-funding system by necessity removes education opportunity for students in order to focus on the tests over education, especially for schools in lower income areas because they stand to suffer the most. We're relying on a system that ensures that people stay where they are. Now, if there isn't a correlation between lost education opportunity and SAT scores, then you might be right, but... Edit: This article goes into the problem in the context of No Child Left Behind and confirms my point: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/10/no-child-left-behind-what-standardized-test-scores-reveal-about-its-legacy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/...

crackercrews 5y ago

You get 200 points per section automatically. [1] And to get into MIT you'd need at least 1,000 points, no matter your race. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT

edflsafoiewq 5y ago
Why does it have such a weird score range?
- xadhominemx 5y ago
  You get negative points for answering incorrectly, to disincentivize blind guessing.
  - crackercrews 5y ago
    I believe it doesn't disincentivize blind guessing. It just counteracts it. If you can eliminate one answer you should guess. Even if you can't eliminate an answer you break even.
    - relaxing 5y ago
      That wouldn’t be blind.
  - AnnikaL 5y ago
    The SAT no longer penalizes guessing (i.e. incorrect answers).[0] [0] - https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/sat/whats-on-the-test/structure https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/sat/whats-on-the-test/stru...
    - xadhominemx 5y ago
      Interesting, thank you
nostrademons 5y ago
800 points on one section will get you into MIT, as that's a perfect score. 1000 on combined seems very unlikely to get you into SAT; the 25th percentile is 1500. https://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/MIT-SAT-scores-GPA https://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/MIT-SAT-scores-GP...
- crackercrews 5y ago
  I was replying to a comment indicating that URMs can get in with extremely low scores. My point is that they can get in with somewhat lower scores. But they still have to clear a much higher threshold than 800 combined.
judge2020 5y ago
Massachusetts Institute of Technology/Typical SAT scores Reading and Writing 730-780, Math 780-800

tootie 5y ago

I think this is a real fundamental problem and something that seems to easy to fix. People just don't know how the other half live. There's a persistent belief that rich people and poor people are like two different species. I got a CS degree from a pretty good school but it was almost pure luck. My high school had programming classes and I enjoyed them. I didn't realize what I was setting myself up for.

wolverine876 5y ago
> There's a persistent belief that rich people and poor people are like two different species. I got a CS degree from a pretty good school but it was almost pure luck. My high school had programming classes and I enjoyed them. When Covid hit, schools in poor communities tried to implement distance learning and discovered that only half (for example, in one city which I don't remember) of families had a desktop or laptop for the student to use - probably those kids aren't going to become programmers. Programming classes are non-existent, at least based on limited knowledge - seriously, look up the programming classes in a nearby poor school district.

renewiltord 5y ago

Out of curiosity, where did the “leave early” belief come from in your opinion? In my community, leaving early would have been considered embarrassing and equivalent to conceding inability, and I fail to be but a representative member - but for you it was actually embarrassing to continue (the opposite).

yardie 5y ago

I grew up a low income student as well but why kind of bullshit were they feeding you? My athlete friends were well aware you needed a 950 for any kind of NCAA consideration. It didn’t matter how good your grades or athleticism if you couldn’t pass that hurdle you were relegated to juco. If anything most of the high school counselors in predominantly poor and black schools just don’t push very hard. They would tell you MIT was too far of a reach. They would tell you the best you could hope for was a private local, community college, or public state university. Who would ever consider Devry and MIT as equivalent?

wolverine876 5y ago
It would be very interesting to hear your personal experience. But how can you make general statements about all poor schools?
- brigandish 5y ago
  He's responding to an anecdote - one that sounds absurd, by the way - so I would say that responding with an anecdote is fine, especially one that actually sounds realistic. Let's hear some anecdotes about being pushed hard in schools based in poor areas before dismissing it.
  - sometimeshuman 5y ago
    "sounds absurd, by the way".. that perhaps explains all the downvotes. One of the surprises about getting older is that stories from your youth sound more and more absurd with time. I didn't grow up with the Internet and the "MIT whiz kid" wasn't common in movies/shows until the mid 90's and ever after. What was a thing during my high school days were the relentless TV commercials for tech schools masquerading as advanced degree institutions. Who lies on HN about a personal story BTW ? What would be the point.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      > that perhaps explains all the downvotes The downvotes are the aggressive reactionary tide through HN, that rises and falls. Your personal observation suggests that some 'progressive' action might be valuable, that there's a systemic problem, and therefore it is shut down. Don't stop telling it please. We need more voices from the real world here.

wolverine876 5y ago

> Are most kids from lower socio-economic backgrounds still clueless about the college admissions process, the difference between colleges, and scholarships. It seems like that is the part that needs to be fixed There's been a lot of research and work on that, though I don't know what progress has been made. You can find NY Times articles from a few years ago. > eliminating SATs is shortsighted Why does the above make SATs any better? They don't predict college outcomes, and they are structured and written in ways that favor wealth, thus providing bad data on students (other than their wealth). Why use them?

chaps 5y ago

I grew up in lower socioeconomic status and can confirm that the university admissions process was never really taught to us in any meaningful way. Teachers never talked about it, my parents never talked about it, counselors didn't talk about it, etc. Our education was built around testing because if our school got bad testing, then the school would lose funding. Our education was damaged as a result, every teacher talked about it as an awful system, and the kids who did well in testing had enough money to pay for tutors, ie they were already advantaged Getting rid of SATs from my perspective sounds like a fantastic idea.

crackercrews 5y ago
> Our education was built around testing because if our school got bad testing, then the school would lose funding. > Getting rid of SATs from my perspective sounds like a fantastic idea. There are two types of standardized tests. The first kind you reference measures the school. They are not used for college admissions. They can affect school funding. The second type of test measures the student. Sometimes a school will report those numbers. But they do not affect the funding a school gets. Getting rid of the SAT would have zero effect on contingent funding for schools.
- chaps 5y ago
  Hm, nah. Consider this: if the schools weren't dependent on the test scores, then they could use that same energy-for-testing to teach their students methods for improving their SAT scores. I genuinely doubt they'll switch energy, but the fact remains that the requirement to game a test-well-or-lose-funding system by necessity removes education opportunity for students in order to focus on the tests over education, especially for schools in lower income areas because they stand to suffer the most. We're relying on a system that ensures that people stay where they are. Now, if there isn't a correlation between lost education opportunity and SAT scores, then you might be right, but... Edit: This article goes into the problem in the context of No Child Left Behind and confirms my point: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/10/no-child-left-behind-what-standardized-test-scores-reveal-about-its-legacy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/...