Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
College and University Discussion
Reply to "MIT's findings on standardized tests is worth noting"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]When MIT reinstated standardized testing again last week, they released the following statement. There is a small footnote here on the efficacy of these tests that if worth reading https://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/we-are-reinstating-our-sat-act-requirement-for-future-admissions-cycles/ [i] Our research shows this predictive validity holds even when you control for socioeconomic factors that correlate with testing. It also shows that good grades in high school do not themselves necessarily translate to academic success at MIT if you cannot account for testing. Of course, we can never be fully certain how any given applicant will do: we're predicting the development of people, not the movement of planets, and people always surprise you. However, our research does help us establish bands of confidence that hold true in the aggregate, while allowing us, as admissions officers, to exercise individual contextual discretion in each case. The word 'significantly' in this bullet point is accurate both statistically and idiomatically] is signifhcantly improved by considering standardized testing especially in mathematics alongside other factors [/i] This is the truth that elite colleges are deliberately choosing to ignore or obfuscate in their quest for racial diversity. How can these colleges teach our kids to think straight and speak the truth, when they are unwilling or unable to acknowledge it themselves? [/quote] [b]I find it interesting that you went immediately to racial diversity instead of, say, legacies, rich kids, poor white kids from Appalachia, athletes, etc.[/b] If you are going to be outraged that some URM get a benefit when it comes to admissions, at least appear to be pissed off that many others do too... Something tells me that you are fine, however, when it comes to the other kids getting into those schools though. [/quote] Being called a racist by an imbecile gaslighter is a badge of honor that any sane person should wear with pride. You clearly don't have the basic grounding in logic. Colleges going TO has nothing to do with Legacies, rich kids, athletes etc. Universities have themselves acknowledged that TO was an idea for them to attract a more racially and economically diverse class. It is also very clear that TO is a disingenuous policy because not everybody who submits an application without a score is treated equally despite the universities claiming to do so. Middle class Asians and white kids from two parent households(the so called privileged kids) who submit apps without scores are more often than not summarily rejected I am not outraged that URM's get into elite universities you moron. What I am outraged about is that in this zero sum game, they are given special treatment in terms of test scores, extra curriculars and personality scores ( as the Harvard case has demonstrated) to rig the game in their favor so that some virtue signaling white liberals can assuage their guilt and feel better about themselves. Any URM that meets the same standard as any other Asian or White kid should be considered without bias and maybe even given a slight edge. Universities don't do that. They are using specious arguments (the SAT/ACT is not a good predictor of college success, so we can ignore it, or that it is biased towards families with wealth, ignoring that applicants black families with incomes nearing $200K, score worse on the test than applicants from white families with incomes less than $40K) to implement a racially discriminatory policy MIT's and the UC research clearly demolishes the first argument. Bringing up legacy and athletes in this discussion about the test score announcement is a complete non-sequitur made with the sole aim of gaslighting the conversation. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics