University Of California Reaches Final Decision: No More Standardized Admission Testing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who does this help? (I have a kid in both scenarios).

1)Public schools where kids all have a 4.3, 4.4, 4.5. I have a kid in DCPS. Due to endless retakes, lax grading every kid in my kid's social circle has straight As. There are dozens if not hundreds. I imagine this is true across Fairfax/Mont Co. too.
2)Private school kids with imperfect grades from elite schools known for rigor. No-one has perfect grades but academic standards are very high.

Are you full pay?

yes, as are all these kids. I'm just wondering what you all think is the better scenario or an upper-middle class white kid from the DMV given these options.

The latter will be off better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will they distinguish among white or Asian kids who all have the same grades?

I get how this allows them to pick minorities. But there will be spots who go to white/Asian kids. And a very large percentage of these kids will have almost identical grades--I know my kid and all of his friends have the same grades
Retake and lax grading makes it almost impossible to not do well in many publics (DCPS for sure).
I get that extracurriculars are one thing--but again, most kids will have a very, very similar version of these as well. And it's not Harvard--we're not looking for kids to split to atom to get into UCSD or even UCLA.

Same as how they do it now. Most kids who have similar grades from similar HS also have very similar standardized test scores.

Some do, some don't. At present time this still gives a data point. I don't think you realize the degree to which grades mean nothing in many publics. They are so inflated---those getting As range from medicare to outstanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The fewer objective measurements, the more opaque cherry-picking they can do.

And in the near future, you'll wonder why they have way fewer Asian students graduates...

It’s not objective. You can game the test, pay for test tutoring and increase scores. The only proven correlation between SATs and ACTs is income.

An 1100 can’t game their way into a 1500. A kid could go up 100 points or something, but it’s not hugely significant. The people who will lose out are the smart kids in not-great schools or not-great backgrounds who will lose out on the opportunity to show what they are capable of in an objective way. There will be shining stars who miss out on opportunities to rise out of their circumstances due to this change. It’s not the win that people arguing for it think it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The fewer objective measurements, the more opaque cherry-picking they can do.

And in the near future, you'll wonder why they have way fewer Asian students graduates...

It’s not objective. You can game the test, pay for test tutoring and increase scores. The only proven correlation between SATs and ACTs is income.

You are overstating this trope by a lot.

+1. It's as if they aren't aware that correlation is not causation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

This will hurt immigrant and low-SES kids who have the smarts to do well on the SAT.

- Ivy League grad immigrant kid who’s parents didn’t go past grade school

Yep, whose parents don’t have the knowledge of the system to play the GPA game.
Signed, immigrant mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The fewer objective measurements, the more opaque cherry-picking they can do.

And in the near future, you'll wonder why they have way fewer Asian students graduates...

It’s not objective. You can game the test, pay for test tutoring and increase scores. The only proven correlation between SATs and ACTs is income.

An 1100 can’t game their way into a 1500. A kid could go up 100 points or something, but it’s not hugely significant. The people who will lose out are the smart kids in not-great schools or not-great backgrounds who will lose out on the opportunity to show what they are capable of in an objective way. There will be shining stars who miss out on opportunities to rise out of their circumstances due to this change. It’s not the win that people arguing for it think it is.

Exactly. Or those who don’t have the parents able to play the new game. Sad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Come on, people with 1500+ scores are objectively smarter than people with 1100.

Absolutely not true. Or necessarily true, that is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

This will hurt immigrant and low-SES kids who have the smarts to do well on the SAT.

- Ivy League grad immigrant kid who’s parents didn’t go past grade school

No, it won't. It'll help them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

This will hurt immigrant and low-SES kids who have the smarts to do well on the SAT.

- Ivy League grad immigrant kid who’s parents didn’t go past grade school

No, it won't. It'll help them.

Says who? Do you even know any immigrant parents?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

This will hurt immigrant and low-SES kids who have the smarts to do well on the SAT.

- Ivy League grad immigrant kid who’s parents didn’t go past grade school

No, it won't. It'll help them.

Says who? Do you even know any immigrant parents?!

yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Come on, people with 1500+ scores are objectively smarter than people with 1100.

I disagree. Half of the SAT is math. I’m a successful middle aged professional and haven’t used math formally in 25 years. Intelligence is not math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given that no one else has yet to follow the Uc’s temporary move to not consider tests at all, seems doubtful that making it permanent changes anything.

I work at a T10 university and it’s being discussed at the administration level. Faculty not all onboard but I don’t think that will matter. My colleagues at other T20 universities hearing same thing. I think the UC decision will influence more schools to become test optional (permanent) not test free.

Some will some won't. Princeton already said it won't keep test optional.

[Anonymous]

The UCs are ranked too highly anyway. So their drop will be appreciated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Come on, people with 1500+ scores are objectively smarter than people with 1100.

I disagree. Half of the SAT is math. I’m a successful middle aged professional and haven’t used math formally in 25 years. Intelligence is not math.

It is basic math, not difficult stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The UCs are ranked too highly anyway. So their drop will be appreciated.

They will just take most of their students from in state, nearby, known-to-them, public schools, so SATs won't really matter.