SAT "adversity" adjustment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ho boy. If you ever wanted to incentivize the appearance of disadvantage, here it is. Watch as parents rush to their department store DNA tests to claim "ancestry" in faraway lands in order to claim allegiance to some oppressed minority. Watch social failings like single-parent households, high crime rates, divorce and abuse become marketable assets. This is disgusting.

Oh, why didn't I get pregnant in my teens and live in that crime ridden neighborhood?

Too bad they didn't add refugee and immigrant status as well - it takes a lot to do well in a new country and new culture especially if relatively recent

This country is bizarre. We are not trying to keep anyone from getting a college education. But, please people, what country takes its most elite educational opportunities (where you should be expected to be advanced in both intellect AND preparation in order to take advantage of the resources), and doles out access based on fairness or population group? Why should we take opportunities paid for and developed through the resources of our country and give them to people just because they specifically don't come from our country?

It’s so painful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, I'll bite. My DC has two well-educated parents, but for a variety of reasons, neither of us has been a high earner. Right now, only one of us is working. We live in a really crummy zip code. All of our college mailings mention fantastic financial aid opportunities. DC lacks classmates that challenge him. The college guidance at high school has been close to zip. Our local mall has shootings and some snooty friends won't let their kids ride bikes to our neighborhood (true story!). Is is so terrible that universities will now have this context?

Universities already have this context. They can see it from the really crummy zip code and high school attended. None of this has been a mystery. Hundreds of millions of dollars of scholarships are available. At best, big schools will now the SAT folks do their work for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, say, Yale cared so much about this, why not just take an entire class that scored high in the adversity scale?

Someone's got to pay!

Full freight suckers!

[Anonymous]

Here are some thoughtful essays on what makes a college admissions process fair. As they reveal, this is a difficult question without easy answers: https://daily.jstor.org/what-makes-a-fair-college-admissions-process/

[Anonymous]

The chart is really creepy and Orwellian. What’s really going on here? White panic about Asians’ high SAT scores?

[Anonymous]

Do URMs or disadvantaged folks want to be profiled this way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do URMs or disadvantaged folks want to be profiled this way?

Why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do URMs or disadvantaged folks want to be profiled this way?

Why not?

Because it's creepy, Orwellian, profiling, and might not be accurate. Even if it gives you an advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do URMs or disadvantaged folks want to be profiled this way?

Why not?

Because students who attend schools with large numbers of minority students, live in less expensive neighborhoods, or have divorced parents aren’t inherently disadvantaged or less capable. There are many, many students in those circumstances who are more capable and achieve higher grades or scores than their peers in more traditional circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do URMs or disadvantaged folks want to be profiled this way?

Why not?

Because it's creepy, Orwellian, profiling, and might not be accurate. Even if it gives you an advantage.

True on the creepy and Orwellian parts. But why turn down an advantage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/sat-to-give-students-adversity-score-to-capture-social-and-economic-background-11557999000

Wonder how they'll define adversity.

It is hard for me to support it as a "donut hole" parent, but I do recognize that this is appropriate direction given how prep classes routinely up SAT scores by 200-300 points.

Thoughts?

Lol donut hole families are not remotely “adverse” when it comes to the SAT. I believe they are attempting to measure true adversity.

I think this is an excellent idea.

OP herr:
Yea thanks, I get that my child will be losing out in the new arrangement. I think this makes SAT2's more important.

SAT2's seem to be falling from favor. Barely any schools even look at them anymore.

You could try ACT. Different company and maybe not doing this.

Barely any schools. Why do people write things that are factually untrue? You can’t be that stupid.

I'm not stupid. Not that many schools look at them. Unless you are going top 10, you really don't need them anymore. VERY few require or even recommend them (Georgetown, MIT, Cal Tech are a few that require and most of the IVy's recommend. Several SLACs that we visited said they will not even look at it, some "consider" it of it helps you).

[Anonymous]

If the adversity score indicates a low SES is likely, how is that need-blind admission?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/sat-to-give-students-adversity-score-to-capture-social-and-economic-background-11557999000

Wonder how they'll define adversity.

It is hard for me to support it as a "donut hole" parent, but I do recognize that this is appropriate direction given how prep classes routinely up SAT scores by 200-300 points.

Thoughts?

Lol donut hole families are not remotely “adverse” when it comes to the SAT. I believe they are attempting to measure true adversity.

I think this is an excellent idea.

OP herr:
Yea thanks, I get that my child will be losing out in the new arrangement. I think this makes SAT2's more important.

SAT2's seem to be falling from favor. Barely any schools even look at them anymore.

You could try ACT. Different company and maybe not doing this.

Barely any schools. Why do people write things that are factually untrue? You can’t be that stupid.

I'm not stupid. Not that many schools look at them. Unless you are going top 10, you really don't need them anymore. VERY few require or even recommend them (Georgetown, MIT, Cal Tech are a few that require and most of the IVy's recommend. Several SLACs that we visited said they will not even look at it, some "consider" it of it helps you).

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT and College Board in general is the great undiscovered scam on the American educational system. This is an interesting idea, but I don't trust them to have thought it through or have the professional capacity to execute this in the appropriate way, if there is one. Plus colleges already look at context. And what will it mean for magnet program kids?
Kahn academy has partnered with the College Board to offer free college prep and this may be the reason that the last two years of SAT scores are out of sync with previous, requiring down-curving perfectly good performance. Word has it they have made recent changes to the SAT without the proper consultation of psychometricians and the recent rounds of testing are unreliable. The article says College Board will send the adversity score to colleges but not tell the family what score they are sending. Is that legal?

The bolded is not surprising for anyone paying attention to the sketchiness surrounding recent equating (significant changes in difficulty level) over the last couple of years but it's mindboggling that they really could have gone that far wrong as to have insufficient psychometric expertise and, if true...

I would like to read more about this, but can't find much beyond the employee housecleaning that was done during the development and change over to the new SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The adversity score is on a scale of 1-100, and takes into account the following:

Neighborhood environment:
Crime rate
Poverty rate
Housing value
Vacancy rate

Family environment:
Median income
Single parent
Education level
ESL

High school environment:
Undermatching
Curricular rigor
Free lunch rate
AP opportunity

Is this for the school address or the student's address? I'm thinking about Wilson for example; it's in a wealthy part of town but serves a lot of economically disadvantaged students.

The index will measure both the home and school addresses.

So kids from the same high school get different adversity scores?

For schools like to TJ and Blair, you are going to get a range of scores.

No you aren’t. TJ is less than 2% FARMS. Less than 2% AA. Less than 2% Hispanic. It pulls from McLean, Oakton and the nicer parts of Herndon, Reston and Chantilly. 90% of the student body is solidly UMC. TJ admissions is pure merit, based on a test. No social engineering or 1st gen or URM bump. Most of the parents have graduate degrees and work in tech fields. It pull from multiple parts of the county. But they are all relatively affluent.

It pulls from Loudon and Prince William County as well.