Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test scores alone are not highly indicative of a successful future college student. It makes no sense to force a college to admit students based on this criteria. I don’t know why we put so much weight upon them. All they really do is generically show relative strengths and weaknesses among high schools.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/02/19/study-finds-little-difference-academic-success-students-who-do-and-dont-submit-sat#:~:text=The%20study%20confirms%20that%20high,who%20will%20succeed%20in%20college.%22

I keep seeing this claim made but there are decades of research studies on this topic and many show that SAT scores are a very strong predictor of not only college grades but future career success as well.

+1 which is why MIT went back to requiring SAT scores.

MIT is only ONE T25 school. Georgetown still requires the SAT since it's not in the common app.

How about HYPS and the other 1,800+ who are test optional? How about the SAT/ACT going digital to even stay relevant?

I think you've missed the test optional trend. Get used to it. It is here to stay.

It is here to stay because more and more schools want to increase DEI. Getting rid of SAT scores is one way to do that. Why not just get rid of GPAs since there is so much grade inflation and grading is als
o pretty subjective?

GPA - and rigor- over 4 years is a better indicator of college success (at least freshman year) than one 3-hour test.

The AOs know this.

The AOs are failures in life. If they weren't, they wouldn't be stuck in an admissions office. They have low level degrees in xyz studies type areas and have their own personal social agendas to fulfill. I know this because I have the misfortune of interacting with many of them. Professors are not happy about the trajectory of admissions decisions over the past decade

The distain for people who work in education across this forum is so sad. If these failures are picking the classes, why would you want to be part of them? They suck at life, but somehow are able to put together talented cohorts year after year?

That was my point. And I "work in education." These people are putting together less and less talented cohorts every year. We have taken them to task on it numerous times but even tenured faculty cannot truly fight the beast of administrative bloat

If you think the AOs are driving, you aren't a faculty member who knows how a university works.

It'd be great if I could stop being accused of not being a faculty member. I will be sure to notify the university to revoke my tenure

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone with a PhD from the Ivy League who taught the undergrads, I can assure all the people saying this guy is a dime a dozen are mistaken. There are so many morons who slip through the cracks of the Ivy League admissions system that it's shocking. I think about 10% of folks in classes I taught probably shouldn't have been in college at all. Others were ver mid, reminiscent of a typical state school student. The fact this guy got rejected by so many schools is entirely indicative of anti Asian racism imo

There are tons of students that have these stats who get rejected - not just Asian. I know a handful, myself. I would imagine those like me also know a (different) handful. It is not as "uncommon" as you would like to believe. Same as it is not "uncommon" to have advanced degree/s from ivy/MIT/top universities in this geographical area (and a few other geographical areas). Just as so many on DCUM are "professors" (usually adjunct) - also a dime a dozen. It has nothing to do with being Asian, but it is a hot topic right now, so someone is trying to draw attention to it.

American Universities have a specific mission to NOT contain one ethnicity of student. In fact, we fought more than one war over this same type of thing. Just drop it.

Well I am not an adjunct. I am a tenured professor at a top 50 research university. And my point was that the insane push toward ethnic diversity and diversity of other types has to a large extent pushed great students out of our schools. At no point in my post did I say it is NOT common for someone of this kid's stats to get rejected. If you read what I wrote, I said he is not a dime a dozen compared to students who get ADMITTED. The students who are admitted include a very large group idiots. If you don't think rejecting highly intelligent people and admitting idiots is a problem, then I don't think I'm interested in talking with you

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone with a PhD from the Ivy League who taught the undergrads, I can assure all the people saying this guy is a dime a dozen are mistaken. There are so many morons who slip through the cracks of the Ivy League admissions system that it's shocking. I think about 10% of folks in classes I taught probably shouldn't have been in college at all. Others were ver mid, reminiscent of a typical state school student. The fact this guy got rejected by so many schools is entirely indicative of anti Asian racism imo

There are tons of students that have these stats who get rejected - not just Asian. I know a handful, myself. I would imagine those like me also know a (different) handful. It is not as "uncommon" as you would like to believe. Same as it is not "uncommon" to have advanced degree/s from ivy/MIT/top universities in this geographical area (and a few other geographical areas). Just as so many on DCUM are "professors" (usually adjunct) - also a dime a dozen. It has nothing to do with being Asian, but it is a hot topic right now, so someone is trying to draw attention to it.

American Universities have a specific mission to NOT contain one ethnicity of student. In fact, we fought more than one war over this same type of thing. Just drop it.

Well I am not an adjunct. I am a tenured professor at a top 50 research university. And my point was that the insane push toward ethnic diversity and diversity of other types has to a large extent pushed great students out of our schools. At no point in my post did I say it is NOT common for someone of this kid's stats to get rejected. If you read what I wrote, I said he is not a dime a dozen compared to students who get ADMITTED. The students who are admitted include a very large group idiots. If you don't think rejecting highly intelligent people and admitting idiots is a problem, then I don't think I'm interested in talking with you

NP--No top 50 research university is admitting idiots. They may be admitting some very smart students who aren't super interested in learning or who have addictions or mental health issues that keep them from showing you their potential, but they're not idiots.

Yes, they are.

You'd be surprised how dumb kids are at top universities. I literally had to teach them as a TA while my spouse was an administrator for the same uni.

Kids so stupid they were incapable of setting up a bank account to collect their paychecks for campus work. Kids so stupid they couldn't do something as basic as submit hw in on time. Kids so stupid they literally did not even know what DNA does by junior or senior year in a biomedical related program. Kids so stupid at math they they were complete and abject failures at doing simple calculations for doing things like making solutions, or for figuring out concentrations. So many kids at supposedly a top university struggling to do basic scientific notation and work with scientific units. Yet when it came to test time they were OK because they could memorize answers.

There are a lot of dumb kids at top US universities. If you try to throw the a curveball on an exam for a question that requires actual critical thinking and for them to actually apply the knowledge they've supposedly learned to a problem they've never seen before, they meltdown, bomb, then all whine about the exam being too hard and the exam questions not being taught in class. Zero critical thinking and problem solving skills these days. Whether or not it is because they're admitting based on diversity rather than scholastic aptitude, I don't know, but the quality of students at top US university is often shockingly bad.

These sound like heavily prepped kids who can’t figure things out on their own. They’ve been spoon fed the questions and answers to memorize so as to give the appearance of being smart. When a situation deviates from what they have prepped for, they are at a loss.

My spouse once encountered a student so stupid they called up the administration office to complain about the fact they they weren't getting paid for their campus work and could no longer afford food/rent.

What happened?

Fursr, this student was so stupid she couldn't figure out how to put on her big girl adult pants and setup a bank account for direct deposit.

Ok, NBD, the checks were mailed to her listed address for physical delivery. Strike number 2. The student was so stupid she took zero responsibilities about updating her address after she moved. All you need to do to change your address is simply update your student profile online, which takes 3 minutes. So of course she's not getting her checks when they keep getting returned because no one knows where the hells she lived.

This student was also so stupid, that despite not getting paid for many weeks, she took zero initiative to investigate the problem with the employment office. Not even a single friggin' phone call. It wasn't until she was in crisis mode facing starvation and homelessness that it dawned on her that she might need to contact the student employment office to see what's up with her paychecks. Of course the predictable happened where rocket genius student too stupid to setup direct deposit btiched out staff about her current predicament.


Yes, this was at a top 10 university, btw. They let in a lot of dumb people these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the fuss. This kid is just as likely to reach his full potential at Georgia Tech as he is at MIT.

Of course if you get discriminated and rejected entry to a restaurant, you can simply go to the next one that doesn't discriminate.
Eat there.

However, the US system so messed up.
We better find out any injustice, and fix them to improve.

Firstly, getting rejected at a "highly rejective school" is not discrimination. It's statistics. 95% of those applying are "highly qualified" yet 95% will get rejected---it's nothing special against your kid, just that they didn't win the lottery along with the other 95%

Oh the horrors. A kid was rejected at MIT/Stanford/CMU/Harvard so they end up at GaTEch. That kid will also be just fine at a CWRU/RPI/similar schools. They will get their CS/Math/Eng degree and work alongside kids from MIT/Stanford/etc....assuming they can somehow recover from not attending a T20 school and find their path in life. Keep us posted with how they do

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Same for GPA, ECs, Essay, etc.
I think test score is at least most objective and fair, so that disadvantaged intelligent and capable students get chance to compete.

Standardized testing has racist origins in the U S (and was used to justify segregation in the military and schools)., is culturally biased ( "pre test" questions that were answered correctly by most blacks were thrown out), and today is more a reflection of household income , test prep, and superscoriing.

Not even close to objective.

Most of the 1,900 colleges that are now test optional will remain after the AA ruling.

Good.

+1

Those arguing against this are just upset their kid has "lost their advantage" of privilege. Also, they apparently do not understand the numbers---there are simply many more kids with 1400/1450+ SAT and "qualified for elite schools" than there are spots. So most will be rejected. Nobody is entitled to a spot at an elite school, nobody. Once you recognize that and plan with great "target schools" you will be happier. Focus on the goal---getting your degree and starting a career, which can be done at a school ranked #30

well, holistic admissions, and "likeability" was added by these colleges as a way to discriminate against Jews. And yet, we still have it.

At least a URM can study for SATs, but no matter how "likeable" an Asian American student is, the AO can just mark them as "unlikeable" without ever having met the applicant.

Seems holistic admissions is far worse in terms of discriminatory practices than SAT scores.

It is not discriminatory to desire a balanced, richly diverse cohort. This means that there is a quota for every single conceivable category, not just race/ethnicity. And that test scores are merely one factor in a holistic review, and not the most important one beyond a certain threshold. There are many colleges in the world that admit based solely on test scores, yet those countries are much less well known for innovation and social mobility. You are welcome to focus on those.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the fuss. This kid is just as likely to reach his full potential at Georgia Tech as he is at MIT.

Of course if you get discriminated and rejected entry to a restaurant, you can simply go to the next one that doesn't discriminate.
Eat there.

However, the US system so messed up.
We better find out any injustice, and fix them to improve.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Same for GPA, ECs, Essay, etc.
I think test score is at least most objective and fair, so that disadvantaged intelligent and capable students get chance to compete.

Standardized testing has racist origins in the U S (and was used to justify segregation in the military and schools)., is culturally biased ( "pre test" questions that were answered correctly by most blacks were thrown out), and today is more a reflection of household income , test prep, and superscoriing.

Not even close to objective.

Most of the 1,900 colleges that are now test optional will remain after the AA ruling.

Good.

+1

Those arguing against this are just upset their kid has "lost their advantage" of privilege. Also, they apparently do not understand the numbers---there are simply many more kids with 1400/1450+ SAT and "qualified for elite schools" than there are spots. So most will be rejected. Nobody is entitled to a spot at an elite school, nobody. Once you recognize that and plan with great "target schools" you will be happier. Focus on the goal---getting your degree and starting a career, which can be done at a school ranked #30

well, holistic admissions, and "likeability" was added by these colleges as a way to discriminate against Jews. And yet, we still have it.

At least a URM can study for SATs, but no matter how "likeable" an Asian American student is, the AO can just mark them as "unlikeable" without ever having met the applicant.

Seems holistic admissions is far worse in terms of discriminatory practices than SAT scores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.

+1 Well stated. So many smart people posting on DCUM don't get this important point. Colleges are much more interested in potential than achievement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test scores alone are not highly indicative of a successful future college student. It makes no sense to force a college to admit students based on this criteria. I don’t know why we put so much weight upon them. All they really do is generically show relative strengths and weaknesses among high schools.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/02/19/study-finds-little-difference-academic-success-students-who-do-and-dont-submit-sat#:~:text=The%20study%20confirms%20that%20high,who%20will%20succeed%20in%20college.%22

I keep seeing this claim made but there are decades of research studies on this topic and many show that SAT scores are a very strong predictor of not only college grades but future career success as well.

+1 which is why MIT went back to requiring SAT scores.

MIT is only ONE T25 school. Georgetown still requires the SAT since it's not in the common app.

How about HYPS and the other 1,800+ who are test optional? How about the SAT/ACT going digital to even stay relevant?

I think you've missed the test optional trend. Get used to it. It is here to stay.

It is here to stay because more and more schools want to increase DEI. Getting rid of SAT scores is one way to do that. Why not just get rid of GPAs since there is so much grade inflation and grading is als
o pretty subjective?

GPA - and rigor- over 4 years is a better indicator of college success (at least freshman year) than one 3-hour test.

The AOs know this.

The AOs are failures in life. If they weren't, they wouldn't be stuck in an admissions office. They have low level degrees in xyz studies type areas and have their own personal social agendas to fulfill. I know this because I have the misfortune of interacting with many of them. Professors are not happy about the trajectory of admissions decisions over the past decade

The distain for people who work in education across this forum is so sad. If these failures are picking the classes, why would you want to be part of them? They suck at life, but somehow are able to put together talented cohorts year after year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, maybe he's right. A black kid with same exact app would def have had a better chance. And I can a colleges POV too. We want diversity.

But what about athletes? Athlete's have even more of a leg up over, say, a musician with same amount of hours into their EC. I see the colleges POV here -- we want better teams -- but how is it even relevant? Very few teams make money. Why not say we want more Oscar winners.

Athletes tend to be white, and white people tend to pay full fare.
Also, the school needs to have enough people on their team to make an actual team. You can't have just 3 people on the lacrosse team.
Read the book "Who Gets in Where and Why". Very interesting.
The college tour is called the "million dollar walk" because all the school needs is 4 kids who fall in love with the school and Ka-ching! A million right there.
If the school didn't have enough religion majors last year, they will go after religion majors.

After reading the book I'm pretty disgusted. They are not looking for academic excellence but a "community". You are paying 1/4 million for your kid to flesh out their "community". I've started looking at schools in other countries. The UK doesn't do this "holistic" BS, they want to look at your academic stats and your essay has to be about your academic focus, not about your personality and what you bring to their so-called "community".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huge cultural chasm here. America does not have the same testing traditions you find in just about every other country in the world. Americans believe in never quitting more than they believe in winning. That's why footbalk teams that lose hard fought games get celebrated almost as though they won.

The difference is every other country in the world has clear rule and transparency.

Another difference is that America rewards persistence. Many other countries give you just one chance to measure up in life. Not so in the USA.

Test measures persistence. It's for 12 years of persistent education
Also they do reward persistence with sort of GPA together with Test

I don't care if you do GPA only Test only GPA + Test, GPA + Test + whatever.

The important thing is clear rule and transparency.

the only thing you are asking for is how much was spent on making sure those scores were achieved. that's it. and not an amount, a percentage of income. if a 400k family spends 40k and an 80k family spends 8k its the same type of leg up, it is.
I am so tired of test prep being a replacement for intelligence and capability.

Same for GPA, ECs, Essay, etc.
I think test score is at least most objective and fair, so that disadvantaged intelligent and capable students get chance to compete.

Standardized testing has racist origins in the U S (and was used to justify segregation in the military and schools)., is culturally biased ( "pre test" questions that were answered correctly by most blacks were thrown out), and today is more a reflection of household income , test prep, and superscoriing.

Not even close to objective.

Most of the 1,900 colleges that are now test optional will remain after the AA ruling.

Good.

+1

Those arguing against this are just upset their kid has "lost their advantage" of privilege. Also, they apparently do not understand the numbers---there are simply many more kids with 1400/1450+ SAT and "qualified for elite schools" than there are spots. So most will be rejected. Nobody is entitled to a spot at an elite school, nobody. Once you recognize that and plan with great "target schools" you will be happier. Focus on the goal---getting your degree and starting a career, which can be done at a school ranked #30

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of those schools could accept more students than they do, and they choose not to do that. They limit the number to maintain fake exclusivity.

I don't think his case will go far, but who knows?

This is not a simple thing to do because of logistics. Most of the elite schools are strapped for space and growing their classes will be a huge undertaking in terms of building dorms and facilities. Yale has grown 15% in the last few year because it was able to build 2 new dorms. Columbia can’t grow without building new dorms in it neighborhood, the same with Berkeley. The neighborhoods of these schools sue to prevent these schools from expanding.

Easier said than done…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year an Asian-American boy who was a USAMO camper was rejected by not only MIT but also CMU. Most DCUMs don’t know what USAMO camp is. It’s a pool of 250-300 best math students in the US competing for a spot on the USA Math Olympic Team. There are only 6 students on the national team. Then they compete against other countries in the Intl Math Olympiad. In the past, making USAMO cam was a guaranteed ticket to MIT. Not anymore. Especially if you are an Asian boy.

No student is owed admission to any college, regardless of their accomplishments.

No student should be owed admission to any college because of their race either.

And that does NOT happen. It is Harvards choice to build their freshman class the way they want. If you want a freshman class of all Asians, then I suggest you head to India or China and you can be happy. But if Harvard wants to have more Hispanics/Blacks/etc to bring more diversity to their campus, so be it.

What most of you do not care to appreciate is that the lower income (many times non-white/non-asian) student who achieves a 1500 and takes 3 APs because that is all their HS offers and overcomes being in a K-12 education system where most in their schools do not make it/even graduate let alone go to a 4 year college, is likely just as smart if not smarter than the privileged white/asian/whatever race student who grew up in a 1% household and never had any wants let alone any "needs". The first kid has had to overcome so much to get to that "1500" so yes it is impressive and top schools want kids like that who will go far. They do not just want to be a repository for elite/1%ers.