Does a student get an adversity adjustment if their mother doesn't love them?

Anonymous wrote:I can not believe how many of you affluent advantaged people are now online rallying against this. Have you no shame? As you no empathy? Have you no understanding? This is not designed to hurt your kids, but to help other kids.

Those kids already get their welfare checks through affirmative action.

Anonymous wrote:Kind of makes north Arlington less desirable, no? Off to Manassas!

There are a number of Manassas area schools that would have a very low adversity score. much lower than south Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I wonder if it makes sense for education-centric families to move to poor performing school districts. Private school if possible in upper elementary and maybe middle, then HS in some 3/10 horror that gives and option to effectively take full days at the local community college, just coming back for gym and "leadership". 9th and 10th grades are hardest because, since those schools teach on a subpar level, kids will need to effectively homeschool in addition to spending wasted hours in the 3/10. However, maybe they can be "sick" a lot, like a lot.

And we'll never have to worry about our kids becoming SJW.

+1

Nailed it. This is the best way to get ahead. I know many people who have benefited from this, both URM and not. I don't think regular people, the general population, understands the impact this has on college admissions, but it is time that they do.

Right. And the rising tide will lift all boats.

No it is impossible to say just yet, we cannot assume the scoring system will just be "linearly varying" by income, there may be extra boosts at certain levels, and if the really purpose was just to be a proxy for AA or Hispanic race, they can weight the factors any way they want, in fact, they can weight the factors differently by state and sub-region or even metro area. And since the scores are all hocus-pocus private and can't be collated nationally since any 1 college admissions department won't every see the whole national denominator or normed reference pool, it will be very difficult to make any decisions based on this until about 10 years or 15 years from now

Here is a summary of the research report to create the new scoring model: https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/professionals/data-driven-models-to-understand-environmental-context.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it is based not on the student as an individual, but the area. Therefore, if wealthy, highly-educated families moved into bad neighborhoods, they could increase the chances of their child getting into an elite college?

Well, kind of. If families move to economically segregated neighborhoods, those neighborhoods will become less economically segregated and therefore the "boost" that a child might receive is lowered.

Just a reminder that the actual SCORE will not change. There will just be additional context on the report.

So, if your well-prepared child who is able to prepare for the SATs with no distractions, and to arrive on test day with a good night's rest and a fully stomach, gets a 1590, that score will be reported just as such.

There will also be a "context score" that may or may not make a difference to admissions, depending on the university's own policies.

THIS. It doesn't change your kid's score. It just means that the score report will also include this other information, which a college can consider or not, as they wish, just like they can already consider information about your child's SES. All these rich people freaking out because their genius children are somehow being discriminated against are ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:Creepy. I can see the privileged white families finding a way to easily game this too.

Really? And privileged black and Asian families won't game it as well.

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think their tools are so crude that they don't distinguish between neighborhoods within the city?

Because I asked admissions officers at several top schools and I do alumni interviews for 1. My hubby does them for another. But I have no idea how the SAT program works. But DC’s good and less desirable neighborhoods are probably too close to be captured under any program unless they are very small.

DC as a whole has poor neighborhoods in very close proximity to the affluent areas (think 1-2 miles or less you are in a totally different neighborhood or sometimes just block —embassy row/Kalamara (Obama/ Kushner/ Bezos) live very close to mount pleasant/Columbia heights).
DC also, as a whole, has low rated public schools (I am not saying any particular school is bad). Smart kids from Wilson have been getting into good schools.

I hope it helps the kids in foster care. On the other hand, it's not just getting into the college. Kids need support after also..

This was such a sad book..
https://www.amazon.com/Short-Tragic-Life-Robert-Peace/dp/147673190X/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=life+of+yale+graduate&qid=1558037412&s=gateway&sr=8-4

The university model has outlived its relevance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holistic admissions colleges already factor this stuff in. Now they do it with census tract data, noting whether a high school is Title 1/how many students qualify for free or reduced meals.

SAT is doing this to make it easier for colleges - who won't have to compute this on their own - and try to make themselves indispensable to an admissions offices.

This was what a I was thinking. Harvard and Williams and Rice and Oberlin will still “craft a class”. And already actively seek to admit disadvantage kids by meeting 100% of need and engaging in Quetbridge and considering URM and first gen. But huge state Us want to make admissions easier than having to consider and weigh these external factors.

My first though is this hurts affluent URM kids. If you are AA and dad is a doctor and you live in a wealthy suburb and have a great education, the sky is the limit because you get lumped in with inner city kids on diversity admissions. This makes that harder.

You do not get lumped in with inner city kids at most Ivy’s. You get lumped in with white kids because admissions does not believe you should be given a break. One of the consequences of this is that most second gen college URM kids at Ivy’s come from private day or boarding schools where you can be lumped in with white kids and still get in. The black kids coming from suburban schools are largely African or first gen. They don’t get lumped in with white kids.

You’re kidding, right? High performing minority kids are the HOLY GRAIL for universities, no matter the background.

Why do you think their tools are so crude that they don't distinguish between neighborhoods within the city?

Anonymous wrote:A lot of misunderstanding on this board. Scores are not adjusted- there is just another number near the score to provide context for the socioeconomic status of the student. It is race neutral which is great for poor whites and Asians. Why are you guys so upset?

Because they never cared about poor white people or Asians. They wanted to get rid of affirmative action so the seat could go to their donut hole families and rich white people too poor to donate a significant amount. The adversity score will now help poor people and most URMs. It will also help city kids. This is great news for all million plus houses in DC. Many of the tracks, possibly the entire city will be disadvantaged. It was that way for the class of 2013 at a top 5. All of DC was rated inner city. I wonder how big the tracks are? But this will definitely help city kids who by the nature of most cities live near poverty.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holistic admissions colleges already factor this stuff in. Now they do it with census tract data, noting whether a high school is Title 1/how many students qualify for free or reduced meals.

SAT is doing this to make it easier for colleges - who won't have to compute this on their own - and try to make themselves indispensable to an admissions offices.

This was what a I was thinking. Harvard and Williams and Rice and Oberlin will still “craft a class”. And already actively seek to admit disadvantage kids by meeting 100% of need and engaging in Quetbridge and considering URM and first gen. But huge state Us want to make admissions easier than having to consider and weigh these external factors.

My first though is this hurts affluent URM kids. If you are AA and dad is a doctor and you live in a wealthy suburb and have a great education, the sky is the limit because you get lumped in with inner city kids on diversity admissions. This makes that harder.

You do not get lumped in with inner city kids at most Ivy’s. You get lumped in with white kids because admissions does not believe you should be given a break. One of the consequences of this is that most second gen college URM kids at Ivy’s come from private day or boarding schools where you can be lumped in with white kids and still get in. The black kids coming from suburban schools are largely African or first gen. They don’t get lumped in with white kids.

The point about incentives for high SES families to move to low SES areas makes me chuckle. It would be bizarre if this change actually leads to racial and class integration, but who knows!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I wonder if it makes sense for education-centric families to move to poor performing school districts. Private school if possible in upper elementary and maybe middle, then HS in some 3/10 horror that gives and option to effectively take full days at the local community college, just coming back for gym and "leadership". 9th and 10th grades are hardest because, since those schools teach on a subpar level, kids will need to effectively homeschool in addition to spending wasted hours in the 3/10. However, maybe they can be "sick" a lot, like a lot.

And we'll never have to worry about our kids becoming SJW.

+1

Nailed it. This is the best way to get ahead. I know many people who have benefited from this, both URM and not. I don't think regular people, the general population, understands the impact this has on college admissions, but it is time that they do.

Right. And the rising tide will lift all boats.

No it is impossible to say just yet, we cannot assume the scoring system will just be "linearly varying" by income, there may be extra boosts at certain levels, and if the really purpose was just to be a proxy for AA or Hispanic race, they can weight the factors any way they want, in fact, they can weight the factors differently by state and sub-region or even metro area. And since the scores are all hocus-pocus private and can't be collated nationally since any 1 college admissions department won't every see the whole national denominator or normed reference pool, it will be very difficult to make any decisions based on this until about 10 years or 15 years from now