SAT "adversity" adjustment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can’t put a number on someone’s adversity.

That’s why people are so frustrated.

My mother was mentally ill and abusive my entire childhood. It was adversity, but I could never include it on an application.

I am not white.

I agree- no one should be reduced to a number- that's why SAT scores in general are problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are so many posters suggesting that this is a bad thing for affluent families? It isn’t. It merely levels the playing field. It’s not a zero-sum game.

Sure it is for families of privilege. Privileged families don’t want to sacrifice their kid’s spot for someone else. Better for the sacrifice to come from a donut hole family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bing. Bing. Bing.

I see this as moving kids over to the ACT

I just read an article that says that the ACT is working on a similar index. There is no escaping this.

Then I think the streaming will happen by college major. i.e. the diversity/adversity admits will self-sort in college, and I don't think the top-brand colleges will have anything close to a clean brand any more

Employers will further fetishize the hard majors from the soft stuff to sort things out.

[Anonymous]

What about a lower income family who lives in affordable housing in a safe and rich county?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bing. Bing. Bing.

I see this as moving kids over to the ACT

I just read an article that says that the ACT is working on a similar index. There is no escaping this.

Then I think the streaming will happen by college major. i.e. the diversity/adversity admits will self-sort in college, and I don't think the top-brand colleges will have anything close to a clean brand any more

Employers will further fetishize the hard majors from the soft stuff to sort things out.

the brand was never clean- use to be just for rich white males with connections... unless by "clean" you mean homogeneity w/ no diversity at all? Look each school only has 2000 spots or so- they can find the smartest of the smart of all groups- don't worry about the brand... I think you mean something else here..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's to stop a kid from lying about income to College Board? Many kids may not actually even know an accurate answer.

I would tell my child things not to report unless it was mandatory. I don’t want to give my kid a HHI number anyway.

Did you read the article? They are using the median income of your neighborhood, not your family income.

Nope. The article is behind a paywall. If you insist on posting paywall articles, please give enough info for people to discuss, or at the very least, don’t get snarky when they don’t know. I pay for the NYT and WaPo. I’m not also paying for the WSJ to participate in this discussion.

I know you already self report stuff like parents education.

I didn't post the article and found a link to another article that wasn't behind a paywall. Read or do some research before you post.

Not the way that works. Post a link to the non paywall site. If people don’t read it, then you can snark. But, everyone trying to comment shouldn’t have to scour the internet looking for a source.

BtW— I did research before posting and found nonpaywall sites. They all quote from the WSJ, but none of them specifically said income was by neighborhood rather than self reported, which is what OO is snarking about.

Post a link people can access to what you want to discuss. Then we can all be on the same page. Easy.

WSJ gives you zero free articles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
That's a terrible idea, because being educated in a wealthy district does not entirely cancel out physical, mental, or family issues that the student can struggle with.

Example: we live in a wealthy area and my son has learning disabilities. If we disclose his learning disabilities, it will hurt his college application. It's not fair that he should get an additional ding just because of his address.

Plus, we're Asian. Another ding.

+1000

Folks this is a terrible idea and demoralizing for all kids from all backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That's a terrible idea, because being educated in a wealthy district does not entirely cancel out physical, mental, or family issues that the student can struggle with.

Example: we live in a wealthy area and my son has learning disabilities. If we disclose his learning disabilities, it will hurt his college application. It's not fair that he should get an additional ding just because of his address.

Plus, we're Asian. Another ding.

+1000

Folks this is a terrible idea and demoralizing for all kids from all backgrounds.

Why would this be demoralizing for a kid who has faced adversity in the manner contemplated by the SAT folks?

[Anonymous]

As we can see from this thread... no only will the privileged be mad about a even field ... the under privileged will be mad their type of adversity was not taken into account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about a lower income family who lives in affordable housing in a safe and rich county?

I would argue those kids are not experiencing adversity as they have access to good, safe housing and good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Plus, PP, those are great suggestions, thank you. Khan academy SAT Prep does pretty much what you are suggesting, I believe. And it's free. So that is already leveling the playing field as far as test prep.

It’s more than the actual prep course. Does the child have access to a device to take the Khan course? Does he or she have Internet at home? Or does the child have to go the library to use the Internet? Does the child have a way to get to the library? Does he or she have parents in the house to supervise nightly prep, or do the parents work at night? Does the child work at night? Do the parents know the importance of test prep, and encourage it?

In NOVA they do. Arlington gives out iPads. FCPS is expanding its pilot and every Mass and HS kid gets a laptop next year. Which they can certainly use to Kahn Academy at school or the library— or anywhere with internet.

Plus, I have heard (but don’t know first hand) that FARMS families in NoVA with kids in school can get free internet.

Nope. But if kids don’t have a certainly level of academic strength going into college, they will fail out of college. Likely with loans.

And the number doesn’t tell you which kids had jobs or had childcare responsibilities. There’s a place on applications for that.

And do the counties also pass out surrogate parents to make sure the kids are doing their test prep? Or provide cash subsidies to replace kids getting after school jobs, so they have time to do test prep?

[Anonymous]

So it’s kind of like a Trulia assessment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Bing. Bing. Bing.

I see this as moving kids over to the ACT

I just read an article that says that the ACT is working on a similar index. There is no escaping this.

Then I think the streaming will happen by college major. i.e. the diversity/adversity admits will self-sort in college, and I don't think the top-brand colleges will have anything close to a clean brand any more

Can you explain what you mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As we can see from this thread... no only will the privileged be mad about a even field ... the under privileged will be mad their type of adversity was not taken into account.

This doesn’t even come close to bringing an even field.

[Anonymous]

Equality is a myth. I believe SATs should be banned period.