5 ms·

IMO the thing that tests do not sample is persistance. Missing that degree of freedom misses important mind-sets to achieving goals. One of the most interestin

IMO the thing that tests do not sample is persistance. Missing that degree of freedom misses important mind-sets to achieving goals. One of the most interesting studies, not specifically focused on "success" / GPA, but on "life-satisfaction" comes from a longitudinal study "Project Talent"[1]. The key correlation to "life-satisfaction"/happiness is how many questions a person _attempts_ to answer on an otherwise un-finishable exam. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Talent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Talent

CharlieDigital 3y ago
> IMO the thing that tests do not sample is persistance See Angela Duckworth's research on "grit"; it is indeed very difficult to test for.
- Animats 3y ago
  No, it's not hard to test for. Military units test for it routinely. At the SEAL/Delta/Army Special Forces level, the testing for that is insane. Some companies used to do this. Around 1900, if you went to work for a major US steel company, you started out shoveling coal. Even if you were destined for management. Japan Air Lines pilot training for new pilots involves a stage where they do grunt jobs in maintenance such as checking incoming part serial numbers.
  - CharlieDigital 3y ago
    > No, it's not hard to test for. Hmm... > ...the testing for that is insane. Sounds like it's...hard to test for.
- omgJustTest 3y ago
  I would agree it is hard but not impossible to test for. The test being very long, at some point people just figure no one can finish it... and in some ways that is how I feel about work in life. I imagine if you told people "we are not testing for correctness, just number of problems solved" then you would skew this test. However when the tests were administered in the longitudinal study, the researchers didn't know which metrics would be important so they just put a lot of problems on it.
nemo44x 3y ago
Wouldn't someone with grit will find a way to persevere and thrive regardless of which institution accepts them?
- mrkstu 3y ago
  Probably, but you want to give the network effects to them to multiply their societal effectiveness. Long term rewarding them is less about assisting them individually but increasing their influence on the general welfare.
causi 3y ago
Disagree. You can retake the tests, hence they do test for persistence.
- anthonypasq 3y ago
  this clearly pales in comparison to the extended effort for 4 years of highschool that is factored into your gpa
  - smeej 3y ago
    In most cases, I'd agree with you, but my parents thought it would be a great idea to have me start taking the exams in 7th grade so that by the time it mattered, boy would I be ready. Over four years, I added 350 SAT (1200-1550) points and 5 ACT points (30-35), but it seems pretty likely to me that it wasn't the direct work ("persistence") that made the difference as much as the generic four more years of schooling and general maturity.
    - gnicholas 3y ago
      I wouldn't say you "added 350 SAT points" so much as your score went up by 350 points between 7th and 11th grade. I would imagine that for practically every student, SAT scores would go up by hundreds of points during this stage of academic development.
      - smeej 3y ago
        > but it seems pretty likely to me that it wasn't the direct work ("persistence") that made the difference as much as the generic four more years of schooling and general maturity.
    - omgJustTest 3y ago
      Retaking tests, to optimize a specific metric, I think is a direct misunderstanding of this point. If one sets a goal to achieve & takes many tries at it, it is similar but not the same as "heres a bunch of questions, answer as many as possible and some correlations in the answers might be more important than others". I think if you want to predict success there are two key factors: 1. Test takers must have weak feedback on their results 2. Test takers must be told that there is not uniformity in the importance of specific questions & some may be worth more than others. The test must be long enough that no one is willing to sit for the entire duration, and test takers should not be given an end-time or instruction on how to take the test. Why? #1 mimics the weak feedback in real-life scenarios, if someone doesn't find you likeable for some unknown reason ... you'll probably see less of them. #2 gets at you may never really know whats key to your success & hopefully by trying you get "lucky".
eapressoandcats 3y ago
Notably it’s not clear if there’s a better determinant of that. Tests at least have the advantage of being a knowable thing you can prep for, instead of whatever you have without tests.

CharlieDigital 3y ago

> IMO the thing that tests do not sample is persistance See Angela Duckworth's research on "grit"; it is indeed very difficult to test for.

Animats 3y ago
No, it's not hard to test for. Military units test for it routinely. At the SEAL/Delta/Army Special Forces level, the testing for that is insane. Some companies used to do this. Around 1900, if you went to work for a major US steel company, you started out shoveling coal. Even if you were destined for management. Japan Air Lines pilot training for new pilots involves a stage where they do grunt jobs in maintenance such as checking incoming part serial numbers.
- CharlieDigital 3y ago
  > No, it's not hard to test for. Hmm... > ...the testing for that is insane. Sounds like it's...hard to test for.
omgJustTest 3y ago
I would agree it is hard but not impossible to test for. The test being very long, at some point people just figure no one can finish it... and in some ways that is how I feel about work in life. I imagine if you told people "we are not testing for correctness, just number of problems solved" then you would skew this test. However when the tests were administered in the longitudinal study, the researchers didn't know which metrics would be important so they just put a lot of problems on it.

nemo44x 3y ago

Wouldn't someone with grit will find a way to persevere and thrive regardless of which institution accepts them?

mrkstu 3y ago
Probably, but you want to give the network effects to them to multiply their societal effectiveness. Long term rewarding them is less about assisting them individually but increasing their influence on the general welfare.

causi 3y ago

Disagree. You can retake the tests, hence they do test for persistence.

anthonypasq 3y ago
this clearly pales in comparison to the extended effort for 4 years of highschool that is factored into your gpa
- smeej 3y ago
  In most cases, I'd agree with you, but my parents thought it would be a great idea to have me start taking the exams in 7th grade so that by the time it mattered, boy would I be ready. Over four years, I added 350 SAT (1200-1550) points and 5 ACT points (30-35), but it seems pretty likely to me that it wasn't the direct work ("persistence") that made the difference as much as the generic four more years of schooling and general maturity.
  - gnicholas 3y ago
    I wouldn't say you "added 350 SAT points" so much as your score went up by 350 points between 7th and 11th grade. I would imagine that for practically every student, SAT scores would go up by hundreds of points during this stage of academic development.
    - smeej 3y ago
      > but it seems pretty likely to me that it wasn't the direct work ("persistence") that made the difference as much as the generic four more years of schooling and general maturity.
  - omgJustTest 3y ago
    Retaking tests, to optimize a specific metric, I think is a direct misunderstanding of this point. If one sets a goal to achieve & takes many tries at it, it is similar but not the same as "heres a bunch of questions, answer as many as possible and some correlations in the answers might be more important than others". I think if you want to predict success there are two key factors: 1. Test takers must have weak feedback on their results 2. Test takers must be told that there is not uniformity in the importance of specific questions & some may be worth more than others. The test must be long enough that no one is willing to sit for the entire duration, and test takers should not be given an end-time or instruction on how to take the test. Why? #1 mimics the weak feedback in real-life scenarios, if someone doesn't find you likeable for some unknown reason ... you'll probably see less of them. #2 gets at you may never really know whats key to your success & hopefully by trying you get "lucky".

eapressoandcats 3y ago

Notably it’s not clear if there’s a better determinant of that. Tests at least have the advantage of being a knowable thing you can prep for, instead of whatever you have without tests.