Anonymous wrote:How can all this be true and yet everyone keeps telling me my kid with a B average who is in advanced math and sciences classes won’t get in anywhere for college?

Yes. I am puzzled too. This is just discouraging that my kid is shut out because of the skin color and income of the parents.

How can all this be true and yet everyone keeps telling me my kid with a B average who is in advanced math and sciences classes won’t get in anywhere for college?

When you have 15% of your freshman class incapable of doing basic addition you might have a problem with admissions.

Banning the SAT was as stupid of a decision as an educational organization could have done.

“Today’s legal action finally changes the conversation from a policy one to a legal one,” said Mark Rosenbaum, Directing Attorney at Public Counsel, a nonprofit law firm. “Use of the SAT/ACT is not merely bad policy; it violates the California Constitution and anti-discrimination statutes, and is therefore legally and morally impermissible. Students should not have to endure the stress and expense of preparing for and taking the SAT, and the admissions process should no longer be contaminated by this discriminatory metric.”

Plaintiffs allege that basing college admissions decisions on SAT and ACT scores amounts to deciding students’ future based on their race and socioeconomic status and not on individual merit. They also point to disparities in access to effective test preparation classes and to bias in test design and test-taking conditions that discriminate against students on the basis of their wealth, race, and disability.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m really mystified by all of the people arguing that an in-state kid who scored 670 math on the SAT isn’t fit for the 3rd or 4th best school in the state.

That kid is. It's the one with a comparative 990 SAT score who's getting into UC San Diego, or lower.

But the overwhelming majority of kids at UCSD are like the 670 math kid, ready to start Calc I or beyond when they arrive. It’s all in the report! The number of kids who need remedial math is too high, but as the report explains the danger is that the remedial kids will fail. And despite what people in this thread claim, those students do fail at shocking rates, as detailed in the report, because the vast majority of students in quantitative majors at UCSD arrive well-prepared, and once the remedial kids reach Calc I, they’re in the same courses, taking the same exams, and subject to the same curve as everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:I’m really mystified by all of the people arguing that an in-state kid who scored 670 math on the SAT isn’t fit for the 3rd or 4th best school in the state.

That kid is. It's the one with a comparative 990 SAT score who's getting into UC San Diego, or lower.

I’m really mystified by all of the people arguing that an in-state kid who scored 670 math on the SAT isn’t fit for the 3rd or 4th best school in the state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many California high schools allow for unlimited retakes, don't punish for late work, etc. The report details that many of these students come from low-income, English-learning environments.

Even if the UC's still used SAT's they would get the same quality of applicant since they select by high school.

Can you imagine being an OOS student paying $90k a year for something like this?

California resident here. Admittedly we are in private, but I don’t know ANY schools that allows unlimited retakes. My DC’s school doesn’t allow retakes on exams at all, kids average a 1450 SAT, and only a fraction will get admitted into UCLA or UCB. I’m not saying some kids without the same competency from lesser performing schools don’t get admitted, but the students are by and large VERY smart. And the ones who need help either leverage the resources to get out to level or transfer to a CC.

The UC system has the best state schools in the country for a reason, so don’t twist it to fit a narrative.

The UC's reputation is coming under fire because they aren't taking the best and brightest. When you are admitting students who can't do 5th grade math, you have a problem. A serious problem. This is how institutions who have a great reputation lose that reputation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The solution is not to make kids provide AP scores. High school students should not have to take college classes in high school just to get into college.

The solution is not to require SAT tests. It’s not clear how well SATs predict anything.

The solution is to bring back SAT high school subject tests or the equivalent and require in-state UC students to get the equivalent of at least C’s on at least three of those.

The SAT subject tests used to measure something very practical: How well students had learned ordinary high school students.

Students obviously can improve their scores on subject tests by studying, and studying for those tests would give them something of value: literacy.

The UC schools could give exemptions for students with good reasoning and language skills along with learning disabilities in math.

When it comes down to it, how different is the SAT math section or the AP Precalc exam from the old SAT subject exam in math, really? They’re all testing approximately the same thing. And the evidence is that as soon as the AP Precalc scores became available, the percent of FTFY UCSD students placing into math beyond Calculus I jumped right back up to where it was when they used the SAT (48%). For kids taking precalc by junior year, admissions is back on track.

And for what it’s worth, many people will disagree with your claim that precalculus somehow became a “college class” in 2024, just because the College Board decided to provide an AP exam for that material.

DP. My junior got a 5 on AP Precalc last year and a 670 math on the August SAT. Either there's something not right about the SAT, or Precalc is too easy.

Don’t be overjoyed w/5 . You typically get 5 if you score 75%(only)

Anonymous wrote:Many California high schools allow for unlimited retakes, don't punish for late work, etc. The report details that many of these students come from low-income, English-learning environments.

Even if the UC's still used SAT's they would get the same quality of applicant since they select by high school.

Can you imagine being an OOS student paying $90k a year for something like this?

California resident here. Admittedly we are in private, but I don’t know ANY schools that allows unlimited retakes. My DC’s school doesn’t allow retakes on exams at all, kids average a 1450 SAT, and only a fraction will get admitted into UCLA or UCB. I’m not saying some kids without the same competency from lesser performing schools don’t get admitted, but the students are by and large VERY smart. And the ones who need help either leverage the resources to get out to level or transfer to a CC.

The UC system has the best state schools in the country for a reason, so don’t twist it to fit a narrative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failure to use the SAT in admissions is making the University of California system look like a clown-car.

Anyone who would make a statement like that is driving the clown car. That said, the UCs like all public schools aren’t top 20 undergraduate schools and they shouldn’t try to be. They are in place to serve their state residents.

UC has two schools in the top 10 undergraduate universities, the next three (SD, Davis and Irvine) are ranked 29, 31 and 31. The next level down are ranked 38, 52, 80 (Santa Barbara, Merced and Santa Cruz) . Not sure where Riverside is but it’s in the top 100.

Having 5 instate options T1-T31 is pretty fortunate for CA residents even though the top 5 are hard to get into if you are from a wealthy high performing area.

If UC San Diego supposedly is a top public university and it churns out graduates who can't add 2+2, maybe it really isn't a top public university, or am I being obtuse?

It's the high schools that are sending out unprepared graduates. Students who can't pass required math courses at UCSD (or at any college) don't graduate.

This is California we are talking about. In what world would the people who run those universities (political appointees) allow low SES/English learners to fail out of school? They won't. If you have been paying attention, California sets academic standards, and when those standards can't be met, they adjust them. It is called equity for a reason. You can argue if equity is good or bad, but at the end of the day, equity is what drives California's decision-making.

And that’s why this once-great state is swirling down the toilet.

That’s a MAGA talking point. Like most maga talking points, it’s garbage.

California remains a wonderful place to live. I live in So Cal and when I travel through the country I pinch myself with gratitude that I get to come back sunny beautiful California.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failure to use the SAT in admissions is making the University of California system look like a clown-car.

Anyone who would make a statement like that is driving the clown car. That said, the UCs like all public schools aren’t top 20 undergraduate schools and they shouldn’t try to be. They are in place to serve their state residents.

UC has two schools in the top 10 undergraduate universities, the next three (SD, Davis and Irvine) are ranked 29, 31 and 31. The next level down are ranked 38, 52, 80 (Santa Barbara, Merced and Santa Cruz) . Not sure where Riverside is but it’s in the top 100.

Having 5 instate options T1-T31 is pretty fortunate for CA residents even though the top 5 are hard to get into if you are from a wealthy high performing area.

If UC San Diego supposedly is a top public university and it churns out graduates who can't add 2+2, maybe it really isn't a top public university, or am I being obtuse?

It's the high schools that are sending out unprepared graduates. Students who can't pass required math courses at UCSD (or at any college) don't graduate.

This is California we are talking about. In what world would the people who run those universities (political appointees) allow low SES/English learners to fail out of school? They won't. If you have been paying attention, California sets academic standards, and when those standards can't be met, they adjust them. It is called equity for a reason. You can argue if equity is good or bad, but at the end of the day, equity is what drives California's decision-making.

And that’s why this once-great state is swirling down the toilet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The solution is not to make kids provide AP scores. High school students should not have to take college classes in high school just to get into college.

The solution is not to require SAT tests. It’s not clear how well SATs predict anything.

The solution is to bring back SAT high school subject tests or the equivalent and require in-state UC students to get the equivalent of at least C’s on at least three of those.

The SAT subject tests used to measure something very practical: How well students had learned ordinary high school students.

Students obviously can improve their scores on subject tests by studying, and studying for those tests would give them something of value: literacy.

The UC schools could give exemptions for students with good reasoning and language skills along with learning disabilities in math.

When it comes down to it, how different is the SAT math section or the AP Precalc exam from the old SAT subject exam in math, really? They’re all testing approximately the same thing. And the evidence is that as soon as the AP Precalc scores became available, the percent of FTFY UCSD students placing into math beyond Calculus I jumped right back up to where it was when they used the SAT (48%). For kids taking precalc by junior year, admissions is back on track.

And for what it’s worth, many people will disagree with your claim that precalculus somehow became a “college class” in 2024, just because the College Board decided to provide an AP exam for that material.

DP. My junior got a 5 on AP Precalc last year and a 670 math on the August SAT. Either there's something not right about the SAT, or Precalc is too easy.

A 670 is a good score for math. That puts you in the 88th user percentile, 93% for national.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The solution is not to make kids provide AP scores. High school students should not have to take college classes in high school just to get into college.

The solution is not to require SAT tests. It’s not clear how well SATs predict anything.

The solution is to bring back SAT high school subject tests or the equivalent and require in-state UC students to get the equivalent of at least C’s on at least three of those.

The SAT subject tests used to measure something very practical: How well students had learned ordinary high school students.

Students obviously can improve their scores on subject tests by studying, and studying for those tests would give them something of value: literacy.

The UC schools could give exemptions for students with good reasoning and language skills along with learning disabilities in math.

When it comes down to it, how different is the SAT math section or the AP Precalc exam from the old SAT subject exam in math, really? They’re all testing approximately the same thing. And the evidence is that as soon as the AP Precalc scores became available, the percent of FTFY UCSD students placing into math beyond Calculus I jumped right back up to where it was when they used the SAT (48%). For kids taking precalc by junior year, admissions is back on track.

And for what it’s worth, many people will disagree with your claim that precalculus somehow became a “college class” in 2024, just because the College Board decided to provide an AP exam for that material.

DP. My junior got a 5 on AP Precalc last year and a 670 math on the August SAT. Either there's something not right about the SAT, or Precalc is too easy.

The debate over whether SAT's inform how one performs in college is over. Trust the science on this one. The Ivies, MIT, etc. all have.

The UC's have to go back to using the SAT in admissions. The conundrum they face is URM's underperform on standardized tests so it will be a lot easier to prove if they discriminate against Asians (and whites). So I doubt they will ever do it.

Anonymous wrote:The solution is not to make kids provide AP scores. High school students should not have to take college classes in high school just to get into college.

The solution is not to require SAT tests. It’s not clear how well SATs predict anything.

The solution is to bring back SAT high school subject tests or the equivalent and require in-state UC students to get the equivalent of at least C’s on at least three of those.

The SAT subject tests used to measure something very practical: How well students had learned ordinary high school students.

Students obviously can improve their scores on subject tests by studying, and studying for those tests would give them something of value: literacy.

The UC schools could give exemptions for students with good reasoning and language skills along with learning disabilities in math.

When it comes down to it, how different is the SAT math section or the AP Precalc exam from the old SAT subject exam in math, really? They’re all testing approximately the same thing. And the evidence is that as soon as the AP Precalc scores became available, the percent of FTFY UCSD students placing into math beyond Calculus I jumped right back up to where it was when they used the SAT (48%). For kids taking precalc by junior year, admissions is back on track.

And for what it’s worth, many people will disagree with your claim that precalculus somehow became a “college class” in 2024, just because the College Board decided to provide an AP exam for that material.