Asian American student with 1590 SAT score blames affirmative action for rejections from 6 colleges

[Anonymous]

I love how no-one is engaging with the point about the surplus of stem applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Same for GPA, ECs, Essay, etc.
I think test score is at least most objective and fair, so that disadvantaged intelligent and capable students get chance to compete.

Standardized testing has racist origins in the U S (and was used to justify segregation in the military and schools)., is culturally biased ( "pre test" questions that were answered correctly by most blacks were thrown out), and today is more a reflection of household income , test prep, and superscoriing.

Not even close to objective.

Most of the 1,900 colleges that are now test optional will remain after the AA ruling.

Good.

+1

Those arguing against this are just upset their kid has "lost their advantage" of privilege. Also, they apparently do not understand the numbers---there are simply many more kids with 1400/1450+ SAT and "qualified for elite schools" than there are spots. So most will be rejected. Nobody is entitled to a spot at an elite school, nobody. Once you recognize that and plan with great "target schools" you will be happier. Focus on the goal---getting your degree and starting a career, which can be done at a school ranked #30

you kid got 1300 SAT?

I can see reading comprehension is not your strong point. Nowhere did it state that.

My 1500/3.99UW, got WL at 2 Top30 schools, Deferred then rejected at their ED1/T10, and accepted at 3 with excellent merit in the 30-50 range and got "go overseas first year at a T60 know for those programs" during a year it had single digit admissions. But they are happy, because they had excellent Target schools and Safety schools, and seriously considered their top safety (ranked in 60s) up until the very end. They recognized that reaches are exactly that---a reach. They got into all their targets and safeties.

They will go far in life because of their drive and motivation and that exists no matter where they actually attend college. Note: they are surrounded by equally smart kids, some who got into T25 schools and choose this one instead (and trust me, it's for the school itself because the location is not an attraction).

Btw, my kid who got ~1300SAT did not even think of T20 schools because that is not the place for them. They got into a T100 school, graduated, got an amazing job and is excelling at life, despite not having a 1550+ on their SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Oh geez. Some people just do well without expensive test prep. My brother and I both scored in the top 1 percent and were national merit scholar finalists and neither of us took a class. We did buy practice books and did a bunch of practice problems. Yes we are Asian (South Asian).

THAT IS TEST PREP.

YOU SHOULD PREP FOR YOUR GPA TOO WHEN YOU TAKE TESTS, MIDTERMS, FINALS, ETC.

Study and test prep are different. Study is content. Test prep is some content but primarily HOW to take the test such as shortcuts that are not taught in math classes which allow you not to spend time on problems working through them and provide more time to answer more questions, and practice questions from previous tests, etc.

Test prep makes a difference because of how you take the exam not whether you can learn new information, handle the courseload, use critical thinking, etc. Test prep is the automation of the process which is why you have kids who without any test prep score a 1300 and then are compared to someone who has the advantage of test prep scoring a 1450. Thats not transparency. That is not a level playing field.

+1000

My kid started with a 1320 on their "test assessment". Did 4 hours of Targeted tutoring (1-1) and on the next practice test got a 1500. All future practice tests and real testing resulted within 20 points of 1500. That 1-1 test prep taught the "test skills" and how to analyze what questions they were getting wrong on the math, so they ended up with an 800 math.
However, I'm 100% certain the 1-1 test prep is what taught those skills, much better and faster than a big ass SAT test prep book with individualized learning.
However, we are privileged and can afford the test prep and have the time to commit to that. Had my kid wanted, another 20 hours+ and they could have gotten the Verbal up to 750+, but we concluded that was a waste of $$$ and time.

who was your kid's tutor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.

Harvard has always prided itself in having a diverse class, in every respect. Every state, every major, every race/ethnicity, many countries etc. And now does have a heavy focus on first-gen opportunities. Zero wrong with any of this.

+1 But apparently many parents of 1550+ have issues with this. I feel for their kids, because if they were truly "that smart" they would be capable of recognizing that their kid will excel wherever they go with the right attitude. It's actually easier to be a star at a 25-50 school where not everyone is "1550+/3.99UW/15+Aps". However at those schools there are still plenty who meet that criteria---my kid got into 3 schools in the 30-50 range, is attending one and all of them are filled with "T25 rejects" or "T25 admitted who chose the best fit for them or in a few cases the most merit" Your kid will still be surrounded with highly motivated smart kids at those schools. In fact they might be a better fit for many if you would just open your eyes and look at more than just rankings.

[Anonymous]

I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

x10000

It depends on the parents. If I see a kid whose parents are not ivy +/- material, and the kid gets into an ivy +/- then the whole thing looks suspicious to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t China. The government does not tell schools what to do.

U.S. Supreme Court will. Haha.

But you think that is how it works, and it really is not - and I will not explain it to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know...I look at my kids' high school instagram page over the past few years and the majority of kids who are attending Ivy Leagues are Asians. It's not even close.

Correct. Just look at the demographics data for Ivy League schools (it’s public information and easily found online). The VAST majority of their students are white and Asian. Very few are URMs.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.

+1 Well stated. So many smart people posting on DCUM don't get this important point. Colleges are much more interested in potential than achievement.

Amen. And thank god we are not like China or Europe. Who wants a system where your entire life trajectory is determined by one exam you take as a CHILD??

+1000

I have one kid who would not have attended college if we lived there. Yet, they are 3 years out of a T100 college, very happy, 3 years into an excellent job at a great company and most importantly enjoying life and fully independent. Many kids do not hit their stride until HS/college, certainly not at age 12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Same for GPA, ECs, Essay, etc.
I think test score is at least most objective and fair, so that disadvantaged intelligent and capable students get chance to compete.

Standardized testing has racist origins in the U S (and was used to justify segregation in the military and schools)., is culturally biased ( "pre test" questions that were answered correctly by most blacks were thrown out), and today is more a reflection of household income , test prep, and superscoriing.

Not even close to objective.

Most of the 1,900 colleges that are now test optional will remain after the AA ruling.

Good.

+1

Those arguing against this are just upset their kid has "lost their advantage" of privilege. Also, they apparently do not understand the numbers---there are simply many more kids with 1400/1450+ SAT and "qualified for elite schools" than there are spots. So most will be rejected. Nobody is entitled to a spot at an elite school, nobody. Once you recognize that and plan with great "target schools" you will be happier. Focus on the goal---getting your degree and starting a career, which can be done at a school ranked #30

well, holistic admissions, and "likeability" was added by these colleges as a way to discriminate against Jews. And yet, we still have it.

At least a URM can study for SATs, but no matter how "likeable" an Asian American student is, the AO can just mark them as "unlikeable" without ever having met the applicant.

Seems holistic admissions is far worse in terms of discriminatory practices than SAT scores.

It is not discriminatory to desire a balanced, richly diverse cohort. This means that there is a quota for every single conceivable category, not just race/ethnicity. And that test scores are merely one factor in a holistic review, and not the most important one beyond a certain threshold. There are many colleges in the world that admit based solely on test scores, yet those countries are much less well known for innovation and social mobility. You are welcome to focus on those.

It is discriminatory if you are trying to achieve that said balance by marking mostly Asian American applicants as "not likeable" having never met them.

I'll ask again.. if a black person was applying for a job, and the hiring team marked them as "not likeable" even though they never met the applicant, wouldn't that raise red flags as being discriminatory? I don't see the difference here.

As stated earlier, if they scored likeability based on the interviewer's feedback, then you have a point, but that's not what is happening. Rather, the AO is marking them as "not likeable" even as the interviewer marked them as "likeable".

That is the discriminatory issue. The "holistic" admissions that they are using is a way to discriminate against one group, much like they did with Jews. And before you say, "oh but there are so many Asian Americans at Harvard, how are they being discriminated against", I'll remind you that there were "so many" Jews at Harvard, too, when Harvard decided to use this holistic admissions to limit their numbers further because they saw that only using stats meant even more Jews. It was wrong then. Why is it not wrong now?

But you keep asking the same question and PP's keep trying to tell you that you are comparing apples and oranges. Look up what the expression means, if you do not understand it.

You are simply not making a viable argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.

+1 Well stated. So many smart people posting on DCUM don't get this important point. Colleges are much more interested in potential than achievement.

Amen. And thank god we are not like China or Europe. Who wants a system where your entire life trajectory is determined by one exam you take as a CHILD??

+1000

I have one kid who would not have attended college if we lived there. Yet, they are 3 years out of a T100 college, very happy, 3 years into an excellent job at a great company and most importantly enjoying life and fully independent. Many kids do not hit their stride until HS/college, certainly not at age 12.

+1

Same reason Chinese people leave China. But they were misinformed that "take this test, get into Harvard." That is not how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.

Harvard has always prided itself in having a diverse class, in every respect. Every state, every major, every race/ethnicity, many countries etc. And now does have a heavy focus on first-gen opportunities. Zero wrong with any of this.

Agree. But some people think that the status quo is supposedly "keeping their kid out". Colleges simply can not have all of one kind in their schools. Plain and simple. There are too many people. Period. We are becoming China.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love how no-one is engaging with the point about the surplus of stem applicants.

It's much easier to scapegoat Black and Brown applicants than to admit your kid decided to compete for a slot in the most competitive major, when slots are capped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test scores alone are not highly indicative of a successful future college student. It makes no sense to force a college to admit students based on this criteria. I don’t know why we put so much weight upon them. All they really do is generically show relative strengths and weaknesses among high schools.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/02/19/study-finds-little-difference-academic-success-students-who-do-and-dont-submit-sat#:~:text=The%20study%20confirms%20that%20high,who%20will%20succeed%20in%20college.%22

I keep seeing this claim made but there are decades of research studies on this topic and many show that SAT scores are a very strong predictor of not only college grades but future career success as well.

+1 which is why MIT went back to requiring SAT scores.

MIT is only ONE T25 school. Georgetown still requires the SAT since it's not in the common app.

How about HYPS and the other 1,800+ who are test optional? How about the SAT/ACT going digital to even stay relevant?

I think you've missed the test optional trend. Get used to it. It is here to stay.

It is here to stay because more and more schools want to increase DEI. Getting rid of SAT scores is one way to do that. Why not just get rid of GPAs since there is so much grade inflation and grading is als
o pretty subjective?

GPA - and rigor- over 4 years is a better indicator of college success (at least freshman year) than one 3-hour test.

The AOs know this.

The AOs are failures in life. If they weren't, they wouldn't be stuck in an admissions office. They have low level degrees in xyz studies type areas and have their own personal social agendas to fulfill. I know this because I have the misfortune of interacting with many of them. Professors are not happy about the trajectory of admissions decisions over the past decade

The distain for people who work in education across this forum is so sad. If these failures are picking the classes, why would you want to be part of them? They suck at life, but somehow are able to put together talented cohorts year after year?

+1

Just sour grapes from the PP.

+1

Not to mention, how much "transparency" does China have?? GTFOH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone with a PhD from the Ivy League who taught the undergrads, I can assure all the people saying this guy is a dime a dozen are mistaken. There are so many morons who slip through the cracks of the Ivy League admissions system that it's shocking. I think about 10% of folks in classes I taught probably shouldn't have been in college at all. Others were ver mid, reminiscent of a typical state school student. The fact this guy got rejected by so many schools is entirely indicative of anti Asian racism imo

There are tons of students that have these stats who get rejected - not just Asian. I know a handful, myself. I would imagine those like me also know a (different) handful. It is not as "uncommon" as you would like to believe. Same as it is not "uncommon" to have advanced degree/s from ivy/MIT/top universities in this geographical area (and a few other geographical areas). Just as so many on DCUM are "professors" (usually adjunct) - also a dime a dozen. It has nothing to do with being Asian, but it is a hot topic right now, so someone is trying to draw attention to it.

American Universities have a specific mission to NOT contain one ethnicity of student. In fact, we fought more than one war over this same type of thing. Just drop it.

Well I am not an adjunct. I am a tenured professor at a top 50 research university. And my point was that the insane push toward ethnic diversity and diversity of other types has to a large extent pushed great students out of our schools. At no point in my post did I say it is NOT common for someone of this kid's stats to get rejected. If you read what I wrote, I said he is not a dime a dozen compared to students who get ADMITTED. The students who are admitted include a very large group idiots. If you don't think rejecting highly intelligent people and admitting idiots is a problem, then I don't think I'm interested in talking with you

NP--No top 50 research university is admitting idiots. They may be admitting some very smart students who aren't super interested in learning or who have addictions or mental health issues that keep them from showing you their potential, but they're not idiots.

Yes, they are.

You'd be surprised how dumb kids are at top universities. I literally had to teach them as a TA while my spouse was an administrator for the same uni.

Kids so stupid they were incapable of setting up a bank account to collect their paychecks for campus work. Kids so stupid they couldn't do something as basic as submit hw in on time. Kids so stupid they literally did not even know what DNA does by junior or senior year in a biomedical related program. Kids so stupid at math they they were complete and abject failures at doing simple calculations for doing things like making solutions, or for figuring out concentrations. So many kids at supposedly a top university struggling to do basic scientific notation and work with scientific units. Yet when it came to test time they were OK because they could memorize answers.

There are a lot of dumb kids at top US universities. If you try to throw the a curveball on an exam for a question that requires actual critical thinking and for them to actually apply the knowledge they've supposedly learned to a problem they've never seen before, they meltdown, bomb, then all whine about the exam being too hard and the exam questions not being taught in class. Zero critical thinking and problem solving skills these days. Whether or not it is because they're admitting based on diversity rather than scholastic aptitude, I don't know, but the quality of students at top US university is often shockingly bad.

These sound like heavily prepped kids who can’t figure things out on their own. They’ve been spoon fed the questions and answers to memorize so as to give the appearance of being smart. When a situation deviates from what they have prepped for, they are at a loss.

My spouse once encountered a student so stupid they called up the administration office to complain about the fact they they weren't getting paid for their campus work and could no longer afford food/rent.

What happened?

Fursr, this student was so stupid she couldn't figure out how to put on her big girl adult pants and setup a bank account for direct deposit.

Ok, NBD, the checks were mailed to her listed address for physical delivery. Strike number 2. The student was so stupid she took zero responsibilities about updating her address after she moved. All you need to do to change your address is simply update your student profile online, which takes 3 minutes. So of course she's not getting her checks when they keep getting returned because no one knows where the hells she lived.

This student was also so stupid, that despite not getting paid for many weeks, she took zero initiative to investigate the problem with the employment office. Not even a single friggin' phone call. It wasn't until she was in crisis mode facing starvation and homelessness that it dawned on her that she might need to contact the student employment office to see what's up with her paychecks. Of course the predictable happened where rocket genius student too stupid to setup direct deposit btiched out staff about her current predicament.


Yes, this was at a top 10 university, btw. They let in a lot of dumb people these days.

This student does not sound stupid, it just sounds as though she was new to the world of work and paychecks. She also may have been shy and nervous about making phone calls to ask about her pay and thought that maybe they were just delayed.

There’s all kinds of reasons a young person could get into a situation like you describe without being stupid.

The description of students described above still sounds like kids who have been prepped for every class and test and just have no idea how to handle a test question that they haven’t previously studied. New material and novel questions are beyond their capabilities.

She sounds like a privileged kid whose parents have done everything for her, and failed to teach basic life skills. Parents made sure she focused on test taking skills but neglected to teach anything else.

I mean I attended a T10 school and my best friend had to be taught how to pump gas (and easily learned) because they had never driven outside of NJ where they lived and in NJ it's illegal to pump your own gas. So at age 20 when I had a car at school, they learned how to pump gas. More a situation where they had never had a need to do it. But they learned quickly once shown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Same for GPA, ECs, Essay, etc.
I think test score is at least most objective and fair, so that disadvantaged intelligent and capable students get chance to compete.

Standardized testing has racist origins in the U S (and was used to justify segregation in the military and schools)., is culturally biased ( "pre test" questions that were answered correctly by most blacks were thrown out), and today is more a reflection of household income , test prep, and superscoriing.

Not even close to objective.

Most of the 1,900 colleges that are now test optional will remain after the AA ruling.

Good.

+1

Those arguing against this are just upset their kid has "lost their advantage" of privilege. Also, they apparently do not understand the numbers---there are simply many more kids with 1400/1450+ SAT and "qualified for elite schools" than there are spots. So most will be rejected. Nobody is entitled to a spot at an elite school, nobody. Once you recognize that and plan with great "target schools" you will be happier. Focus on the goal---getting your degree and starting a career, which can be done at a school ranked #30

+1

There are good schools even from #31 through #200 or so.

People are obsessed with T25s.

Expectations for college admissions need to get reset.

+1

THe 25-50 range is filled with T25 rejects and some who smartly chose "fit over ranking". People need to realize there are smart kids at all schools in the T200 and in the T30-60 there are A LOT of really smart kids, because that is where those who get rejected from T25 go. It is easier to be a star/get research positions/work with Profs at a 25-50 school where only 25-40% are T25 candidates and the rest are "just below". Parent need to reset their expectations and realize rankings mean little---the advantages for attending an elite school are largely for the disadvantaged, if you are already T1-5% your kid still has those advantages/connections no matter where they go.