Full pay matters

[Anonymous]

Can’t*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like many of you didn’t read the full article…

“ …Even when applicants had the same SAT or ACT scores, those from the richest families were more than twice as likely to be admitted, according to the study, which analyzed data on test scores and parental income taxes for nearly all U.S.”

Sigh. Because wealth doesn't only impact academics. It impacts access and achievements in extra-curriculars. Isn't that OBVIOUS to you??? Extra-curriculars are the single most inequitable category of college admissions, FAR surpassing test scores and grades. Any intelligent child can get good grades and test scores, and there are free or low-cost tutors and test prep available everywhere in the US. But no amount of talent can propel a poor kid to the highest levels of any EC that requires money over a sustained period of time.

My kid will have been playing violin for 14 years by the time she applies to college. Twice a week year round, $100/hr, which is cheap given how reputable her teacher is. The violin cost a lot of money. She has won competitions and achieved a high level. Her STEM-minded friend went to Paris last winter for a genetics competition, and does that sort of thing regularly. And that's nothing compared to travel sports (10K+ a year), horse eventing, polo, sailing, flying, car racing, etc.

You seem to have NO IDEA of how much parents can spend on extra-curriculars, and how it influences college admissions.

This!!!

The SAT test scores are the biggest equalizer for smart poor kids.

Only if the definition of a "good" score can be adjusted based on circumstances/a school's average score. A smart poor kid using free test prep resources, only taking it once, and coming from a less well resourced school is still going to have lower scores than a UMC private school kid with hours of tutoring.

A majority of private school kids (even with hours of tutoring) actually don't have 1500+. The big3, big5, big10 etc type of kids have higher scores because they are smarter.
Magnet and selected public schools have much higher sat average than a regular private school.

It's true that not all private schools are alike or have 99ile SATs. But let's not say smarter. SAT scores are not intelligence tests, they are preparation tests. So rather than rewarding the smartest kids, it rewards the grinders. Which is ok but let's not say it measures nuance, intelligence or potential.

SAT may reward students who have grit, who don’t easily give up - but isn’t that the type of student who universities want? Kids who have mental fortitude? By the way student are usually dynamic in many other ways too - passionate, sense of humor, self motivated, courageous.

I know so many students who are children of immigrants who self study for the SATs (and the APs) who do extremely well. Yes, they are intelligence and that’s what the test captures to a degree, but they also have grit. Boatloads of it.

The kids who don’t do well are missing academic foundations and tend to give up easily. It doesn’t mean they’re not intelligent, they’re just missing some core knowledge.

You're putting too much stock in the SAT.

It's all based on test preparation. That's it.

Some posters try to romanticize the poor (Asian or Indian) immigrants who self study for the SAT. False. The South Asian and Asian culture is rampant with test prep cram mills. The kids all prep for these exams via test prep services. Yes, the UMC households can afford test prep, but it doesn't negate the fact that Asian households- regardless of income- use test prep services extensively.

This is not true.
There is more peer reviewed research supporting the validity of standardized testing than there is for global warming or the big bang.
Particularly at the high end of of the scale, test scores are particularly useful in predicting college academic performance.
https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

Those cram mills that you refer to so derogatorily are improving the students' cognitive ability.

Now show me research where an average sat of 1400 versus 1500 changes the ability for people to graduate and receive top fellowships. You can't because it doesn't exist. The over reliance on test scores to explain everything is the problem. The SAT would need to be a lot more comprehensive.