4 ms·

It's important to remember that the legal context around admissions has changed over the past few years. 2-3 years ago, it seemed clear that (1) the courts were

It's important to remember that the legal context around admissions has changed over the past few years. 2-3 years ago, it seemed clear that (1) the courts were likely to strike down policies that support diversity via admissions and (2) they were going to use test scores as a way to measure the inequity. [A] It appeared then that schools were no longer requiring test scores as a defensive move - if they don't require tests, it's harder to use them in court. Today, the court appears to be signaling that they won't continue cracking down. [B] [C]. Accordingly, we should not be surprised that that admissions offices are reacting by reinstating the requirements - they've always been useful; they were just briefly dangerous. [A] https://www.harvard.edu/admissionscase/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2022/05/FINAL_Key-Facts_FINAL.pdf https://www.harvard.edu/admissionscase/wp-content/uploads/si... [B] https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-virginia-case-over-race-high-school-admissions-2024-02-20/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-virgi... [C] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/02/05/supreme-court-declines-west-point-affirmative-action-case https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/02/05/s...

lapcat 3y ago
> It appeared then that schools were no longer requiring test scores as a defensive move - if they don't require tests, it's harder to use them in court. From the article: "When the coronavirus pandemic scrambled testing, Yale and many other colleges dropped requirements that applicants submit standardized tests such as the SAT or ACT." Why is everyone looking for a convoluted theory when there's a very obvious explanation?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- bombcar 3y ago
  Remote computer proctoring is a solved problem, way before Covid, so the pandemic may be part of the reason, but it's unlikely to be the whole reason. Universities bandwagon just as much as anyone else does, and the reasons they give afterwards may not be the reasons they went into it.
  - lapcat 3y ago
    That's like saying remote instruction was a solved problem before Covid. The problem with the pandemic was that almost every student in the country was suddenly thrown into a remote situation, and nobody was prepared for that. It's the same with remote work. It may have been a "solved problem" before the pandemic (and I personally WFH before the pandemic), but nobody was prepared for a huge portion of the country's workforce to be suddenly thrown into remote work.
  - faeriechangling 3y ago
    It was as solved problem for the pre-pandemic volume of students
- barryrandall 3y ago
  A significant portion of the US population wants to believe the convoluted theory over the obvious explanation.
karaterobot 3y ago
It seems like many universities (especially Ivy league schools) who made testing optional during the pandemic did so for logistical reasons: they couldn't ask students to sit in a big room with a hundred other kids to take a test. I can't say whether COVID provided cover for the motives you list above, but the proximate reason given was sufficient. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/coronavirus-sat-act-admission/2020/06/15/18c406dc-acca-11ea-a9d9-a81c1a491c52_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/coronavirus-s...
EchoChamberMan 3y ago
This makes a lot of sense, thanks.

lapcat 3y ago

> It appeared then that schools were no longer requiring test scores as a defensive move - if they don't require tests, it's harder to use them in court. From the article: "When the coronavirus pandemic scrambled testing, Yale and many other colleges dropped requirements that applicants submit standardized tests such as the SAT or ACT." Why is everyone looking for a convoluted theory when there's a very obvious explanation?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bombcar 3y ago
Remote computer proctoring is a solved problem, way before Covid, so the pandemic may be part of the reason, but it's unlikely to be the whole reason. Universities bandwagon just as much as anyone else does, and the reasons they give afterwards may not be the reasons they went into it.
- lapcat 3y ago
  That's like saying remote instruction was a solved problem before Covid. The problem with the pandemic was that almost every student in the country was suddenly thrown into a remote situation, and nobody was prepared for that. It's the same with remote work. It may have been a "solved problem" before the pandemic (and I personally WFH before the pandemic), but nobody was prepared for a huge portion of the country's workforce to be suddenly thrown into remote work.
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  It was as solved problem for the pre-pandemic volume of students
barryrandall 3y ago
A significant portion of the US population wants to believe the convoluted theory over the obvious explanation.

karaterobot 3y ago

It seems like many universities (especially Ivy league schools) who made testing optional during the pandemic did so for logistical reasons: they couldn't ask students to sit in a big room with a hundred other kids to take a test. I can't say whether COVID provided cover for the motives you list above, but the proximate reason given was sufficient. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/coronavirus-sat-act-admission/2020/06/15/18c406dc-acca-11ea-a9d9-a81c1a491c52_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/coronavirus-s...

EchoChamberMan 3y ago

This makes a lot of sense, thanks.