3 ms·

the movement was well underway before covid hit - you are trying to rewrite history.

by ejb999 3y ago

lapcat 3y ago
> you are trying to rewrite history. No, I'm not. Yale (along with a number of college colleges) suspended the testing policy in 2020 due to the pandemic. That's an indisputable historical fact. "For nearly four years Yale’s undergraduate admissions process has been test-optional. The experience, originally necessitated by the pandemic, has been an invaluable opportunity to think deeply about testing policy and to generate new data and analyses. With testing availability now fully restored for prospective applicants around the world, we have reevaluated our policy with the benefit of fresh insights." https://admissions.yale.edu/test-flexible https://admissions.yale.edu/test-flexible Let me put it this way: before the pandemic there was already a work-from-home movement. But when countless companies suddenly decided to do WFH in 2020, it wasn't because of the movement! It was because of the pandemic. And a lot of those companies are now calling for return-to-office. It's the exact same thing with standardized testing. There's literally no difference between the two cases. We don't need a political conspiracy theory when there's a very obvious and logical explanation for what happened. The pandemic was a forced experiment for WFH and a forced experiment for many other things, such as the omission of standardized testing. We had students taking classes from home too!
- legitster 3y ago
  > The experience, originally necessitated by the pandemic, has been an invaluable opportunity to think deeply about testing policy and to generate new data and analyses. You are kind of ignoring everything Yale themselves said after the words "originally necessitated by the pandemic". Nothing in their long, thoughtful writeup says "it was only done for convenience, sorry". If anything, it's a carefully worded and researched examination of them earnestly pursuing the policy on academic grounds and examining why the policy failed.
  - lapcat 3y ago
    It's funny how your tone has changed from the scornful "it's still crazy to me that anyone thought this was a good idea" to praising Yale for "their long, thoughtful writeup" and "a carefully worded and researched examination of them earnestly pursuing the policy on academic grounds". 1) It wasn't a crazy idea. As ejb999 noted, a number of colleges had already done it before the pandemic. 2) It wasn't crazy to suspend the testing requirement during the pandemic. 3) It wasn't crazy to continue an experiment that had already been in progress in order to get conclusive results. 4) Yale didn't say the policy was a disaster. They simply decided that the other policy is better for them, in light of the empirical results. 5) There was no official end date of the pandemic. Thus, different institutions will move at a different pace. And Yale also mentioned as a factor for them, "With testing availability now fully restored for prospective applicants around the world".

the movement was well underway before covid hit - you are trying to rewrite history.

by ejb999 3y ago

the movement was well underway before covid hit - you are trying to rewrite history.

> you are trying to rewrite history. No, I'm not. Yale (along with a number of college colleges) suspended the testing policy in 2020 due to the pandemic. That's an indisputable historical fact. "For nearly four years Yale’s undergraduate admissions process has been test-optional. The experience, originally necessitated by the pandemic, has been an invaluable opportunity to think deeply about testing policy and to generate new data and analyses. With testing availability now fully restored for prospective applicants around the world, we have reevaluated our policy with the benefit of fresh insights." https://admissions.yale.edu/test-flexible https://admissions.yale.edu/test-flexible Let me put it this way: before the pandemic there was already a work-from-home movement. But when countless companies suddenly decided to do WFH in 2020, it wasn't because of the movement! It was because of the pandemic. And a lot of those companies are now calling for return-to-office. It's the exact same thing with standardized testing. There's literally no difference between the two cases. We don't need a political conspiracy theory when there's a very obvious and logical explanation for what happened. The pandemic was a forced experiment for WFH and a forced experiment for many other things, such as the omission of standardized testing. We had students taking classes from home too!

legitster 3y ago
> The experience, originally necessitated by the pandemic, has been an invaluable opportunity to think deeply about testing policy and to generate new data and analyses. You are kind of ignoring everything Yale themselves said after the words "originally necessitated by the pandemic". Nothing in their long, thoughtful writeup says "it was only done for convenience, sorry". If anything, it's a carefully worded and researched examination of them earnestly pursuing the policy on academic grounds and examining why the policy failed.
- lapcat 3y ago
  It's funny how your tone has changed from the scornful "it's still crazy to me that anyone thought this was a good idea" to praising Yale for "their long, thoughtful writeup" and "a carefully worded and researched examination of them earnestly pursuing the policy on academic grounds". 1) It wasn't a crazy idea. As ejb999 noted, a number of colleges had already done it before the pandemic. 2) It wasn't crazy to suspend the testing requirement during the pandemic. 3) It wasn't crazy to continue an experiment that had already been in progress in order to get conclusive results. 4) Yale didn't say the policy was a disaster. They simply decided that the other policy is better for them, in light of the empirical results. 5) There was no official end date of the pandemic. Thus, different institutions will move at a different pace. And Yale also mentioned as a factor for them, "With testing availability now fully restored for prospective applicants around the world".