SAT "adversity" adjustment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want to know what the lowest possible adversity score will be. Like if a white kid lives in a $1.2m home in 16th street heights, going to private, with a $500K HHI, does that kid get a higher score than the nearly-identical one living in Bethesda, just because his neighborhood is economically more diverse? And does the kid in Bethesda get “0”?

Yes!! A kid living in a $4 million dollar DC home has a lower neighborhood score than a standard suburb. Big three school and all.

You do realize that they know which school a kid attends when they are making decisions, right? Also, certain zip codes in DC are very wealthy. The adversity score is one piece of the information. They aren't ignoring all the other information available to them. Sheesh.

There are not really wealthy zip codes in DC. There are wealthy neighborhoods. DC is small. There are wealthy zip codes in V and MD.

And look at 20008, which covers some of the wealthiest enclaves, but also lower priced apartment buildings and some fixed income and subsidy housing. Are the low income kids in that zone screwed?

Possibly. But I think they may be doing this by census tract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

[Anonymous]

This is an attempt for the College Board to remain relevant as a huge money maker.

As schools go SAT optional (example, JMU) because the test is inherently unfair and zero predictor of college success, they have to figure out how a way to remain relevant and keep their foothold as a huge moneymaker.

They make TONS of money by Selling student’s information that first take the PSAT. If SAT becomes completely unnecessary, they will lose this revenue stream.

[Anonymous]

Ha ha. Just because it’s not race based does not mean an admission process will favor white Becky. Tons of ways to limit any demographics numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

Try to let go of whatever anger and jealousy you have toward these people you knew in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

You are misunderstanding. Marginal as used by me, one of the previous posters, refers to the FSU dean’s admission that an adversity index will result in fewer privileged candidates at the margins getting in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an attempt for the College Board to remain relevant as a huge money maker.

As schools go SAT optional (example, JMU) because the test is inherently unfair and zero predictor of college success, they have to figure out how a way to remain relevant and keep their foothold as a huge moneymaker.

They make TONS of money by Selling student’s information that first take the PSAT. If SAT becomes completely unnecessary, they will lose this revenue stream.

Tell you what, let in a bunch of kids with 700/1600 SAT scores and good grades to MIT and see what happens.

[Anonymous]

yup

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

Try to let go of whatever anger and jealousy you have toward these people you knew in college.

I don't have anger or jealous toward them, they were my friends. My point was that the statement that marginal white candidates haven't been getting in for decades is false. Also, maybe you need to let go of your anger toward URMs you feel are inderserving, and your anger about the adversity score?

[Anonymous]

^^^ jealousy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

Try to let go of whatever anger and jealousy you have toward these people you knew in college.

I don't have anger or jealous toward them, they were my friends. My point was that the statement that marginal white candidates haven't been getting in for decades is false. Also, maybe you need to let go of your anger toward URMs you feel are inderserving, and your anger about the adversity score?

Your command of the english language is atrocious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

Try to let go of whatever anger and jealousy you have toward these people you knew in college.

I don't have anger or jealous toward them, they were my friends. My point was that the statement that marginal white candidates haven't been getting in for decades is false. Also, maybe you need to let go of your anger toward URMs you feel are inderserving, and your anger about the adversity score?

Huh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the guarantee that this won't be used to devalue SAT scores for students with low adversity index? College Board doesn't address this in any of their communications that I've seen. David Coleman was interviewed on a network news program and he sounded really nervous and said nothing of substance because he knows it's bogus.

No mystery here: some marginal applicants of privilege ain’t getting in. FSU dean said as much.

that's been the case for decades

marginal URM have no business going to many of these schools. Hopefully they will get weeded out

No it hadn't been the case for decades. My boyfriend in college and all his friends were total slackers who got Cs and some Ds. All of them white upper middle class. They also all ended up with excellent jobs due to connections. This adversity score is a counterbalance to the benefits UMC kids receive. Now you know how URMs who have no control over their race and were systematically excluded felt. There are studies that show that equally qualified black men are still less likely to be hired then their white counterparts. The next time you judge an individual of color based on overall stereotypes rather than giving them the initial benefit of the doubt as an individual, think about how you feel when your kids are being "unfairly" impacted by things entirely out of their control.

Jobs and college admissions are two different things.

I take that to mean you're going to continue to use your stereotypes to be bigoted against others, and be mad if you and your family are in anyway negativey impacted based on things outside your control. Regarding your claim that jobs and college are two different things. Being discriminated against in the job market perpetuates the continued lower earning power of URMs, which reduces the resources available to the families for education, tutors, extracurriculars, which then is your basis for calling them marginal and therefore not worthy of a spot at a decent college.

Try to let go of whatever anger and jealousy you have toward these people you knew in college.

I don't have anger or jealous toward them, they were my friends. My point was that the statement that marginal white candidates haven't been getting in for decades is false. Also, maybe you need to let go of your anger toward URMs you feel are inderserving, and your anger about the adversity score?

Your command of the english language is atrocious.

You may be right about my command of the English language, but at least I am not worried about some poor kid who has had disadvantages in life benefiting from the adversity score.

[Anonymous]

Single mom to a white boy here; English is not my first language, so I guess some bases are covered.
Now, when do I need to move to a bad school district?
As for poor disadvantaged kids, I feel for them but my ultimate responsibility is towards my own kid (and I wish their parents felt the same).