3 ms·
It's a bit more nuanced than what you're describing. I suggest listening to this (or reading the transcript): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/17/podcasts/the-da
by yau8edq12i 3y ago
It's a bit more nuanced than what you're describing. I suggest listening to this (or reading the transcript): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/17/podcasts/the-daily/the-war-on-the-sat.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/17/podcasts/the-daily/the-wa...
- verteu 3y agoDoesn't seem very nuanced to me. The transcript directly supports anon291's claim. Transcript: "So this in-depth study looking at college admissions that was released last summer ended up finding that the richest applicants have huge advantages in college admissions, and a lot of people have assumed that the SAT must be one of the advantages that richer applicants have." Then they controlled for the obvious confounders, and the assumption was wrong. (Big surprise: Wealthy people attend better schools.) I, too, am curious why schools changed their admissions policies before studying the matter closely.
- ejb999 3y ago>>I, too, am curious why schools changed their admissions policies before studying the matter closely. Probably for the same reason Oregon decided to decriminalize most drugs thinking it would reduce usage and harm (it didn't).
- PeterHolzwarth 3y agoI understand your good intentions, but a poor response is one that says "go spend time listening to this podcast." That's someone else's article-length response. If you think that podcast/article made interesting points, briefly summarize them in your comment and provide the link for those who want to dig in a bit more.