Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

I do think most with low SAT math scores ended up not doing STEM, as they couldn’t pass the “weed out” prerequisites. Many of those kids might have to change their intended majors quite a few times as they move down the list, shattering their confidence in the meanwhile.

Most non STEM majors still have to take calculus, and the professors are saying that these kids need remedial math. They are not ready for college math even as non STEM majors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

I do think most with low SAT math scores ended up not doing STEM, as they couldn’t pass the “weed out” prerequisites. Many of those kids might have to change their intended majors quite a few times as they move down the list, shattering their confidence in the meanwhile.

Most people with low sat scores aren’t interested in a stem major. The assumption everyone wants to do stem is plaguing this thread. Not everyone needs differential equations; I’d even argue most don’t

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

I do think most with low SAT math scores ended up not doing STEM, as they couldn’t pass the “weed out” prerequisites. Many of those kids might have to change their intended majors quite a few times as they move down the list, shattering their confidence in the meanwhile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT is a racist test. There is no reason to go back to it.

The SAT is the best measure to identify and elevate smart and brilliant minority kids who are otherwised overlooked and ignored by test optional.

Test optional specifically benefits mediocre wealthy students of all colors and races.

Can you explain how they’re overlooked? If you don’t have good grades, you are not qualified.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

I do think most with low SAT math scores ended up not doing STEM, as they couldn’t pass the “weed out” prerequisites. Many of those kids might have to change their intended majors quite a few times as they move down the list, shattering their confidence in the meanwhile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

Anonymous wrote:Historically, the UC's had mediocre to horrible SAT scores for the lower 25th percentile and even between the 25th and 50th percentile. This was true at the second tier UC's like UC Irvine, Davis and San Diego. It was even true for UC Berkeley and UCLA.

With test blind in place the competency of the lower half of these schools is even worse.

California ranks close to last in the performance of its high school students. Politicians have mandated that UCs open up more admission slots so you are seeing a huge watering down of standards. The sad thing is that there are more than enough high achieving, high scoring students in its public high schools. They just happened to be the wrong race or ethnicity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT is a racist test. There is no reason to go back to it.

The SAT is the best measure to identify and elevate smart and brilliant minority kids who are otherwised overlooked and ignored by test optional.

Test optional specifically benefits mediocre wealthy students of all colors and races.

Can you explain how they’re overlooked? If you don’t have good grades, you are not qualified.

The high SAT kids generally have great grades AND high SATs

Test optional rejects the high performers for the best "narrative" which is exasperated by inflated grades.

SAT scores are the best objective measure to indicate the most qualified students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

You will eliminate the vast majority of black and hispanic students. The faculty can chirp all they want. Talk of reinstating the SAT is just a fantasy.

The UC Regents outlined the eugenicist origins of standardized testing, arguing the tests were historically designed to validate white superiority and maintain institutional exclusion.

The most progressive state in the country is not going to go back to a test with its roots in white supremacy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

Most likely by admitting fewer unprepared students. Right now UC's admit by high school. The lower SES, URM high schools have the same admissions chances as high performing ones. Presumably the SAT will provide cover to deviate from this and pick more Asian and white students.

This. Texas has similar issues with the 6% rule. Gaming GPA over high school rigor is rewarded. There is a big sea change coming there as well. At least scores are used but it does not matter as much with the guaranteed GPA admit rules.
When you have taught in the UT system and now are at an ivy you see the difference however, in the past few years the percent unprepared for the ivy has gone up a lot. The bottom 15-20% is not close to the median student anymore. Professors are frustrated everywhere; our CA colleagues have merely seen the issues longer and are fed up. Ivies are (quietly) going back to academic minimums over diversity goals but it will take 3 more admission cycles to fully reverse the damage the TO/pandemic years did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:280 is a really paltry number for the size of UC. This is simply rage bait for anti CA MAGAs.

1. UCs require placement tests, so the unprepared students aren’t walking into Calculas.
2. UCs focus on conceptual math and don’t allow calculators which is the exact opposite of what is happening in high school. You can get a 750+ on the math SAT, a 5 on AP Calculus, score high enough to place into Calculus and still struggle. This is great and I’m glad they do it this way.
3. Some UCs have math professors and TAs with such strong accents that no one outside their region can understand them.
4. Math courses are weeder courses for STEM and economics. You have top students and cheaters at the top but then #2 /#3 drop too many to the bottom. The school wants a bell curve for distribution but they have a K.

The reality in CA is that there isn’t a bell curve if your class is representative of the geography, race and socioeconomic groups in CA. UCs could reinstate the SAT but that doesn’t mean that they would scrap the geographic and socioeconomic goals. Using the SAT would not reopen seats for high performing Asians and Whites.

Ultimately what needs to happen is there needs to be better math instruction in public schools AND the top students in poor schools need to be separated into honors classes that are not filled with unmotivated students. CA has taken away tracking at many poor schools so the brightest kids are stuck with loser kids who constantly disrupt the class. So who supports detracking and does not believe the top Latino and Black students should be grouped into high performing math classes- yup you guessed it UCSD's School of Education.

UCSD runs a charter middle and high school of 850 students that is on UCSD's campus where 93% of students qualify for Free/Reduced Price Lunch, with Hispanic students making up 57% and African American 22%. There are NO honors math classes at the school. They do NOT even offer AP Calculus (not even AB) only non-honors Calculus. They don't offer true honors English since the ONLY 9th and 10th grade English classes are called Advanced English.

So how does UCSD do teaching this population. Well only 33% of AP exams taken at the school received a score of 3 or higher. Only 13% exceeded math standards in 8th grade and 25% in 12th grade. These students are mixed in the same class as the 65% of students who received scores of not passing (received scores of not met or nearly met) in 8th grade and the 50% who didn't pass in 11th grade. How are smart poor kids supposed to thrive in this environment?

Maybe UCSD should be looking at the high school that is on their campus and realize this model for teaching math doesn't work. How are they not mortified at what is going on?

And how does this compare to the affluent high school by UCSD called La Jolla High School that is 7 miles away? Of course they track students into regular and advanced math. They also offer dual enrollment community college math classes at the high school - MESA COLLEGE MATH 150 CALCULUS WITH ANALYTIC GEOMETY I (Fall) Grades 11-12, MESA COLLEGE MATH 151 CALCULUS WITH ANALYTIC GEOMETY II (Spring) Grades 11-12, MESA COLLEGE MATH 254 (INTRO TO LINEAR ALGEBRA) (Fall)Grades 11-12, and MESA COLLEGE MATH 245 (DISCRETE MATH) (Spring) Grades 11-12. You get a completely different education if you are a top student here.

The other point is how lazy UCSD is about actually teaching the remedial class once they get admitted. Student who are in that class are often the ones who attend horrifically bad high schools in the poorest areas of the state. They never got quality instruction in math. (There was an article about a student who was enrolled in AP Calculus at Lincoln High in San Diego and because they couldn't get enough students to take the class the school dropped the calculus class two weeks before the end of the first semester. The school then enrolled all the students who were in the class into Ceramics. This seems like a crazy story but it is true! This is what the poorest students often face trying to take math.) UCSD instead of actually having a person directly teaching the class they sit the students in front of computers on a curriculum called Aleks and students have to complete work all online. If they have question they can ask the TA proctoring the class but no one is actually teaching the students. And like the post above says, many students really can't understand some TA's due to really strong accents.

UC's could make everyone take a placement exam in April /May and then tell anyone majoring STEM who doesn't pass they need to take a community college class or take an intensive math class over the summer at the UC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

If you only admit students with an SAT math score of 700+ for STEM majors at UCLA/Berkeley, then you will have a well-prepared undergraduate class, regarld of HS teaching quality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"For example, for three consecutive year, 20-30% of UC Berkeley first-semester calculus students who participated in mathematical diagnostic testing displayed severe[b][u] preparation deficits."

Ouch.

How is this going to be fixed by SAT scores if it is the HS math instruction that sucks?

Most likely by admitting fewer unprepared students. Right now UC's admit by high school. The lower SES, URM high schools have the same admissions chances as high performing ones. Presumably the SAT will provide cover to deviate from this and pick more Asian and white students.

Anonymous wrote:I am glad that they want to reinstate testing. I hope the Board of Regents actually listen to them. The problem, however, does start in the K-12. We give the kids chrome books and tell them to go on iReady and think that if they spend enough time on the platform, they are learning. This is a fallacy. Kids also do not spend time working on math problems like they used to. They want immediate answers. They can't stand to be frustrated.