Why Caltech is now requiring test scores

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to ask a question and don't want any pitchforks from the crowd.
What's the correlation between doing well on the SAT and being able to even do half-well in the Caltech curriculum? Doesn't Caltech check for AP Physics, Chem, Calc, Bio, etc.-all better measures for if someone can even begin the curriculum? Caltech students should be coming in with advanced material that the SAT just doesn't cover.

Disadvantaged high schools don't offer these courses.

At any rate, Caltech thought they could do without scores and were test blind for three years. They tried. It didn't work out.

Is Caltech reasonably accepting students from disadvantaged high schools now to warrant this? They aren't some great social mobilizer. It's a school producing future researchers who tend to be wealthier or have parents of advantaged backgrounds. I think it's strange to cover up the story by trying to shut down any questioners with claims of not uplifting the poor-the poor are hardly at all in the conversation to begin with.

NP. What is your guess as to why they went back to requiring test scores?

Isn’t the answer in the petition? The professors don’t really know how to teach. They rely on students being extraordinary. Reading between the lines, they need the kind of students who can teach material to themselves if the prof misses or can’t teach it properly on their own.

No, that’s not what they say. They say the mission is to teach extraordinary students at an extraordinary level, and that it is in fact no possible to make the non-extraordinary students extraordinary. There are plenty of other school where the failing students would be at the top or where the mission is to meet them where they are at.

Can you explain how the SAT remedies their issue? They have an applicant pool filled with math competition winners and students with advanced coursework beyond BC calc. They reasoned students are falling behind because a class that typically has 10-15 students resulted in poor scores within the Electrical Engineering department-not even a core class. Then, they also
don't mention any other contexts-what's the change in class composition? As someone noted, their current class coming up is going to be 50% women, that's not typical for Caltech. For a long time they didn't let anyone in with a sub 700 SAT score, then they dropped that. What happened during that period? So much missing context from the writers, it's shocking that this is a professor.

Dp, pretty clear they looked at the evidence and decided they needed standardized test scores, regardless of whether the petition was well written.

Yes, I understand the conclusion. I'm asking for the DCUM to look at the clear logical gaps and to question the intentions of bringing back these standardized scores outside of just what a college AO says (in this case, a professor).

There aren’t clear logical gaps, we simply don’t have access to all the information the school did when deciding to abandon test blind and return to test required.

Oh my god, you are dense. Neither did the professors writing the letter, basing their decision off of a couple exam scores and a few meetings where they ate at students.

Well, one of us is dense, but it isn’t me.

DP. They made interesting points, and it is kind of concerning that you cannot think beyond an AO press release statement...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m on the fence about reinstating SAT. I’m all for moving toward tests as GPA’s can vary widely based on school policies/retakes/ grade inflation and vary even among teachers within schools. However, college board is a racket. It’s a poorly constructed test and frankly any test that signing up for an expensive prep course can raise your score 200 is not an effective test. I wish the US had something similar to the British school model with A levels.

The faculty are missing the mark. Correlation does not mean causation. Test blind or optional occurred at the same time during the pandemic. The sophomores that are so deficient missed foundational upper level math skills spending half their freshman and sophomore years in virtual. They jumped into junior year after 2 years of basically self learning and then crammed to get good scores on their tests and AP exams.

To get into Cal Tech, kids need AP Calc BC, Physics etc. Don’t tell me that a kid who can get an A in those classes and a 4 or 5 on the AP wouldn’t have been able to prep for the SAT.

No, the faculty petition addresses that. They say the top students are still well prepared despite the pandemic; the increasing number of failing students is due to lack of skill as indicated by SAT Math score.

No, you don’t understand. Cal Tech is still very competitive. You aren’t getting in without As in AP Physics,, CALC BC, high AP scores, math and science competition winners. This is the floor not the ceiling! You can have all those things and still not get in. There is no way that any of those students wouldn’t score 700 on the SAT math section. Heck my humanities kid, has a 700 on math.

What is far more likely is that the high schools created gaps in foundational learning during the pandemic. The students who are struggling now likely wouldn’t be struggling prepandemic. The pandemic took a toll on this cohorts mental health, increasing anxiety and reducing executive function. These mental health struggles absolutely impact your performance in a rigorous problem and aren’t going to show up on the SAT.
It’s also possible that going test optional opened doors for some of the top kids at Ivy schools. The Cal Tech faculty are missing that others schools are after top talent too and have been growing their STEM programs.

I used to work in higher ed and the one thing that always amazed me was how a faculty member could be brilliant in their slice of a particular field but utter idiots the minute they switched lanes.

[Anonymous]

Now you have 26 ACT and 900 SAT grade inflated A students applying to Harvard, etc.

Not anymore, now that Harvard requires scores again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Now you have 26 ACT and 900 SAT grade inflated A students applying to Harvard, etc.

Not anymore, now that Harvard requires scores again.

Or really ever. It amuses me that people think that people with the best extracurriculars all happen to be idiots with 900 SAT Scores when that clearly isn't the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to ask a question and don't want any pitchforks from the crowd.
What's the correlation between doing well on the SAT and being able to even do half-well in the Caltech curriculum? Doesn't Caltech check for AP Physics, Chem, Calc, Bio, etc.-all better measures for if someone can even begin the curriculum? Caltech students should be coming in with advanced material that the SAT just doesn't cover.

Disadvantaged high schools don't offer these courses.

At any rate, Caltech thought they could do without scores and were test blind for three years. They tried. It didn't work out.

Is Caltech reasonably accepting students from disadvantaged high schools now to warrant this? They aren't some great social mobilizer. It's a school producing future researchers who tend to be wealthier or have parents of advantaged backgrounds. I think it's strange to cover up the story by trying to shut down any questioners with claims of not uplifting the poor-the poor are hardly at all in the conversation to begin with.

NP. What is your guess as to why they went back to requiring test scores?

Isn’t the answer in the petition? The professors don’t really know how to teach. They rely on students being extraordinary. Reading between the lines, they need the kind of students who can teach material to themselves if the prof misses or can’t teach it properly on their own.

No, that’s not what they say. They say the mission is to teach extraordinary students at an extraordinary level, and that it is in fact no possible to make the non-extraordinary students extraordinary. There are plenty of other school where the failing students would be at the top or where the mission is to meet them where they are at.

Can you explain how the SAT remedies their issue? They have an applicant pool filled with math competition winners and students with advanced coursework beyond BC calc. They reasoned students are falling behind because a class that typically has 10-15 students resulted in poor scores within the Electrical Engineering department-not even a core class. Then, they also
don't mention any other contexts-what's the change in class composition? As someone noted, their current class coming up is going to be 50% women, that's not typical for Caltech. For a long time they didn't let anyone in with a sub 700 SAT score, then they dropped that. What happened during that period? So much missing context from the writers, it's shocking that this is a professor.

Dp, pretty clear they looked at the evidence and decided they needed standardized test scores, regardless of whether the petition was well written.

Yes, I understand the conclusion. I'm asking for the DCUM to look at the clear logical gaps and to question the intentions of bringing back these standardized scores outside of just what a college AO says (in this case, a professor).

There aren’t clear logical gaps, we simply don’t have access to all the information the school did when deciding to abandon test blind and return to test required.

Oh my god, you are dense. Neither did the professors writing the letter, basing their decision off of a couple exam scores and a few meetings where they ate at students.

Well, one of us is dense, but it isn’t me.

DP. They made interesting points, and it is kind of concerning that you cannot think beyond an AO press release statement...

You’re not a different poster but nice try. I’m not the one pretending that the decision was made on the info in the petition, to the contrary, pointed out this is a stupid thread because we don’t have access to the university’s data, which obviously goes well beyond one ee class.

[Anonymous]

The letter says "He also administers a midterm and final exam. This fall, he reused the 2020 final exam to create a control comparison". That doesn't make any sense. Which 2020 exam did he reuse? Was it spring 2020? Fall 2020? That was the height of COVID. Was that exam taken in person or it was taken online? You can't then compare the results of a 2020 exam to 2024. A better comparison would be the 2019 exam to 2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to ask a question and don't want any pitchforks from the crowd.
What's the correlation between doing well on the SAT and being able to even do half-well in the Caltech curriculum? Doesn't Caltech check for AP Physics, Chem, Calc, Bio, etc.-all better measures for if someone can even begin the curriculum? Caltech students should be coming in with advanced material that the SAT just doesn't cover.

Disadvantaged high schools don't offer these courses.

At any rate, Caltech thought they could do without scores and were test blind for three years. They tried. It didn't work out.

Is Caltech reasonably accepting students from disadvantaged high schools now to warrant this? They aren't some great social mobilizer. It's a school producing future researchers who tend to be wealthier or have parents of advantaged backgrounds. I think it's strange to cover up the story by trying to shut down any questioners with claims of not uplifting the poor-the poor are hardly at all in the conversation to begin with.

NP. What is your guess as to why they went back to requiring test scores?

Isn’t the answer in the petition? The professors don’t really know how to teach. They rely on students being extraordinary. Reading between the lines, they need the kind of students who can teach material to themselves if the prof misses or can’t teach it properly on their own.

No, that’s not what they say. They say the mission is to teach extraordinary students at an extraordinary level, and that it is in fact no possible to make the non-extraordinary students extraordinary. There are plenty of other school where the failing students would be at the top or where the mission is to meet them where they are at.

Can you explain how the SAT remedies their issue? They have an applicant pool filled with math competition winners and students with advanced coursework beyond BC calc. They reasoned students are falling behind because a class that typically has 10-15 students resulted in poor scores within the Electrical Engineering department-not even a core class. Then, they also
don't mention any other contexts-what's the change in class composition? As someone noted, their current class coming up is going to be 50% women, that's not typical for Caltech. For a long time they didn't let anyone in with a sub 700 SAT score, then they dropped that. What happened during that period? So much missing context from the writers, it's shocking that this is a professor.

Dp, pretty clear they looked at the evidence and decided they needed standardized test scores, regardless of whether the petition was well written.

Yes, I understand the conclusion. I'm asking for the DCUM to look at the clear logical gaps and to question the intentions of bringing back these standardized scores outside of just what a college AO says (in this case, a professor).

There aren’t clear logical gaps, we simply don’t have access to all the information the school did when deciding to abandon test blind and return to test required.

Oh my god, you are dense. Neither did the professors writing the letter, basing their decision off of a couple exam scores and a few meetings where they ate at students.

Well, one of us is dense, but it isn’t me.

DP. They made interesting points, and it is kind of concerning that you cannot think beyond an AO press release statement...

You’re not a different poster but nice try. I’m not the one pretending that the decision was made on the info in the petition, to the contrary, pointed out this is a stupid thread because we don’t have access to the university’s data, which obviously goes well beyond one ee class.

Then stop responding if you think it's stupid? Back to the lack of critical thinking issue...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to ask a question and don't want any pitchforks from the crowd.
What's the correlation between doing well on the SAT and being able to even do half-well in the Caltech curriculum? Doesn't Caltech check for AP Physics, Chem, Calc, Bio, etc.-all better measures for if someone can even begin the curriculum? Caltech students should be coming in with advanced material that the SAT just doesn't cover.

Disadvantaged high schools don't offer these courses.

At any rate, Caltech thought they could do without scores and were test blind for three years. They tried. It didn't work out.

Is Caltech reasonably accepting students from disadvantaged high schools now to warrant this? They aren't some great social mobilizer. It's a school producing future researchers who tend to be wealthier or have parents of advantaged backgrounds. I think it's strange to cover up the story by trying to shut down any questioners with claims of not uplifting the poor-the poor are hardly at all in the conversation to begin with.

NP. What is your guess as to why they went back to requiring test scores?

Isn’t the answer in the petition? The professors don’t really know how to teach. They rely on students being extraordinary. Reading between the lines, they need the kind of students who can teach material to themselves if the prof misses or can’t teach it properly on their own.

No, that’s not what they say. They say the mission is to teach extraordinary students at an extraordinary level, and that it is in fact no possible to make the non-extraordinary students extraordinary. There are plenty of other school where the failing students would be at the top or where the mission is to meet them where they are at.

Can you explain how the SAT remedies their issue? They have an applicant pool filled with math competition winners and students with advanced coursework beyond BC calc. They reasoned students are falling behind because a class that typically has 10-15 students resulted in poor scores within the Electrical Engineering department-not even a core class. Then, they also
don't mention any other contexts-what's the change in class composition? As someone noted, their current class coming up is going to be 50% women, that's not typical for Caltech. For a long time they didn't let anyone in with a sub 700 SAT score, then they dropped that. What happened during that period? So much missing context from the writers, it's shocking that this is a professor.

Dp, pretty clear they looked at the evidence and decided they needed standardized test scores, regardless of whether the petition was well written.

Yes, I understand the conclusion. I'm asking for the DCUM to look at the clear logical gaps and to question the intentions of bringing back these standardized scores outside of just what a college AO says (in this case, a professor).

There aren’t clear logical gaps, we simply don’t have access to all the information the school did when deciding to abandon test blind and return to test required.

Oh my god, you are dense. Neither did the professors writing the letter, basing their decision off of a couple exam scores and a few meetings where they ate at students.

Well, one of us is dense, but it isn’t me.

DP. They made interesting points, and it is kind of concerning that you cannot think beyond an AO press release statement...

You’re not a different poster but nice try. I’m not the one pretending that the decision was made on the info in the petition, to the contrary, pointed out this is a stupid thread because we don’t have access to the university’s data, which obviously goes well beyond one ee class.

Then stop responding if you think it's stupid? Back to the lack of critical thinking issue...

I’m pointing out your lack of critical thinking because you are assuming the petition was the universe of data on which the university based its decision.

[Anonymous]

The people defending these professors who are clearly out of life are making very poor arguments as to why there's a connection between SAT scores and the matriculation to graduation pipeline at Caltech, a research institution that heavily favors math excellence by many other metrics in its admissions process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people defending these professors who are clearly out of life are making very poor arguments as to why there's a connection between SAT scores and the matriculation to graduation pipeline at Caltech, a research institution that heavily favors math excellence by many other metrics in its admissions process.

Somehow the dummies at MIT and Cal Tech came to the same decision on the need to use standardized testing in admissions decisions. Quite confident the decision makers at these schools are more competent than a random dcum poster who favors test optional. In another year, nearly all of the T25 will have joined them, and this unfortunate era where Covid grade inflation skewed college admissions will be nearing an end.

[Anonymous]

A lot of students don't want to go to CalTech because it is not diverse and way too small.

MIT class of 2027 has almost 1,100 students- 10% are international students (so around 110); 38% white, 40% Asian, 15 percent black, 16% Latino. 49% male, 48% female , Non-binary, other makes up the rest.

CalTech class of 27 only 263 students
Male 59%, female 41%,
Asian 37%, White 22%, Black 5%, Hispanic of any race 11%, non resident Alien 17%, 18% international. Race is NOT collected for international students. That is a lot of international students for such a small school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people defending these professors who are clearly out of life are making very poor arguments as to why there's a connection between SAT scores and the matriculation to graduation pipeline at Caltech, a research institution that heavily favors math excellence by many other metrics in its admissions process.

Somehow the dummies at MIT and Cal Tech came to the same decision on the need to use standardized testing in admissions decisions. Quite confident the decision makers at these schools are more competent than a random dcum poster who favors test optional. In another year, nearly all of the T25 will have joined them, and this unfortunate era where Covid grade inflation skewed college admissions will be nearing an end.

Someone can be wrong and highly intelligent. Not everything is black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people defending these professors who are clearly out of life are making very poor arguments as to why there's a connection between SAT scores and the matriculation to graduation pipeline at Caltech, a research institution that heavily favors math excellence by many other metrics in its admissions process.

Somehow the dummies at MIT and Cal Tech came to the same decision on the need to use standardized testing in admissions decisions. Quite confident the decision makers at these schools are more competent than a random dcum poster who favors test optional. In another year, nearly all of the T25 will have joined them, and this unfortunate era where Covid grade inflation skewed college admissions will be nearing an end.

Someone can be wrong and highly intelligent. Not everything is black and white.

And to add on, getting a PhD in Electrical Engineering doesn't mean you know much about admissions processes or higher education enrollment. I think it's clear that attracting putnam talent is about attracting IMO finalists and courting them with a pipeline of incentives: first scholarships then peers. This is what caltech did, and then they dropped the scholarships and quickly those intelligent students went to MIT for competitive math. Really, I am not sure why this would matter much at all in terms of actual math education, since math research is far from Putnam questions, but that is that professors opinion. Do I think he's wrong? Sure, doesn't take away his credentials in Electrical Engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to ask a question and don't want any pitchforks from the crowd.
What's the correlation between doing well on the SAT and being able to even do half-well in the Caltech curriculum? Doesn't Caltech check for AP Physics, Chem, Calc, Bio, etc.-all better measures for if someone can even begin the curriculum? Caltech students should be coming in with advanced material that the SAT just doesn't cover.

Disadvantaged high schools don't offer these courses.

At any rate, Caltech thought they could do without scores and were test blind for three years. They tried. It didn't work out.

Is Caltech reasonably accepting students from disadvantaged high schools now to warrant this? They aren't some great social mobilizer. It's a school producing future researchers who tend to be wealthier or have parents of advantaged backgrounds. I think it's strange to cover up the story by trying to shut down any questioners with claims of not uplifting the poor-the poor are hardly at all in the conversation to begin with.

caltech, along with all T10s, IS trying to provide equity with acceptance policies, finding "diamonds in the rough" so to speak. There are kids like this, brilliant yet in a disadvantaged school and no ability to try the hard APs the top high schools have. it is just that SAT scores help find these kids and test blind was hindrance, like MIT, caltech, dartmouth...and on and on have said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people defending these professors who are clearly out of life are making very poor arguments as to why there's a connection between SAT scores and the matriculation to graduation pipeline at Caltech, a research institution that heavily favors math excellence by many other metrics in its admissions process.

Somehow the dummies at MIT and Cal Tech came to the same decision on the need to use standardized testing in admissions decisions. Quite confident the decision makers at these schools are more competent than a random dcum poster who favors test optional. In another year, nearly all of the T25 will have joined them, and this unfortunate era where Covid grade inflation skewed college admissions will be nearing an end.

and Thank Goodness for that! Mine were lucky to make it in to a T10 or two and many T25s unhooked, with scores of course as we would not have let them overshoot if they did not have solidly in-range scores. There were so many less lucky bright unhooked asians and other overrepresented groups shut out, who in 2017-2019 got in. The scoir data front he local public magnets went haywire for 2021 and hit its worst in 2023, the last year of TO plus racially biased admissions. 2024 was a bounce back toward common sense and by this time next year I agree most T25 will be test required