Anonymous wrote:Yes, but what I see here is people already trying to figure out how to game the system. that was my first thought -- our house is in a high SES district, but our summer house is in a place with a shitty school district. Why can't I just have the kid take the exam there over the summer and use that address? That kind of thing. I predict you're gonna see a lot more of that kind of stuff and after Felicity huffman and the rowing machine and all that, people will feel completely justified in gaming the system in this way.

My God you people are total idiots! You can use your summer house address all you want but you still have to put down what high school your kid went to for god sake’s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's to stop a kid from lying about income to College Board? Many kids may not actually even know an accurate answer.

You can get close enough to income if you look at the home value and neighborhood...they won't need to be precise...

Again alot of misinformation here. They will use the kid's home address and school address to make the calculation. I think this would be great and allow for parents to be more open minded about school districts they would not have considered. Also, one could argue that the college board is doing this to cover their own asses as it stands now- the SAT is clearly discriminatory against low SES students given how it breaks down perfectly by SES. Unless we are saying with certainty that poor kids are on average just not as smart as rich kids (which is not the case- I went to high school in Greenwich CT and ppl got high scores but trust me they were not super-smart geniuses) the test is biased against those who are poor. This attempts to provide much needed context to the score. It is a great idea- race neutral and not something you can fudge.

Anonymous wrote:

So much for parents sacrificing to move into a nice, safe neighborhood with a good neighborhood school. When you can spend half the price and buy in a crappy school system and get your kid into any school they want.

This idea is half baked.

This was not well though through.

I hope you realize that that has always been the case. A kid from West Virginia who does really well has their pick of colleges...or a kid at a high school who rarely ever send applicants to a particular college.

Going to a school like TJ is asinine unless you just care about the "quality" of the education, or will be in the top 5% of the graduating class.

It would be far wiser to go to a lesser school and be #1 there, than to be middle of the pack at an elite school...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/articles/sat-to-give-students-adversity-score-to-capture-social-and-economic-background-11557999000

Wonder how they'll define adversity.

It is hard for me to support it as a "donut hole" parent, but I do recognize that this is appropriate direction given how prep classes routinely up SAT scores by 200-300 points.

Thoughts?

this is a fallacy--I think external studies have that when you use a real SAT for pre and a real SAT for post (not some in-house equivalent amassed from selecting problems from prior tests or creating analogues)prep raised scores on average 30-40 pts (which is not unsubstantial, but not drastic) and that most prep places massaged data in ways to make gains appear far larger than an external assessment would find.

I taught LSAT and SAT Math prep in law school as my side gig for Princeton Review. This is true. Most of the gain then were in math, because verbal is hard to move. Now, reading comp is hard to move, and English sentence, grammar section is less so. Most gains are based on test familiarity, which kids can get without spending thousands of dollars. I was able to move my kids scores 60 points in about 10-15 hours with just the SAT Book of 8 released tests.

So, as an aside, I will save you thousands of dollars.

Have your kid take a released copy. Look at what they missed. How many in each section. Pick their weakest section that isn’t reading comp— the RC score is very hard to move. Your kid has either read their whole life or not. So, look where they can get the most points back with the least effort.

Have your kid work through the SAT Test Book pointers on their worst, no RC section, and do some Kahn Academy on that section.

Have your kid kid retake their worst section only several times using the released tests and really look and understand what they missed and why.

Repeat if you have time and they missed a significant number of questions on their second worst non RC section.

Take another couple full tests in the lead up to the SAT.

That’s all most test prep companies do. And they are less efficient, because they are teaching to a class and do both language and math, which your kid might not need. And they have to pretend RC will move. It won’t.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but what I see here is people already trying to figure out how to game the system. that was my first thought -- our house is in a high SES district, but our summer house is in a place with a shitty school district. Why can't I just have the kid take the exam there over the summer and use that address? That kind of thing. I predict you're gonna see a lot more of that kind of stuff and after Felicity huffman and the rowing machine and all that, people will feel completely justified in gaming the system in this way.

Because that won't be your high school of record...LOL...it doesn't matter where you take the SAT, the college board knows what high school you attend...

Anonymous wrote:What's to stop a kid from lying about income to College Board? Many kids may not actually even know an accurate answer.

You can get close enough to income if you look at the home value and neighborhood...they won't need to be precise...

This should also stop the insanity, shenanigans, and pressure around trying to get into those "elite" high schools...LOL

Now kids will hopefully stay at their local neighborhood schools...and all of the schools will get better as opposed to the brain drain...

What's to stop a kid from lying about income to College Board? Many kids may not actually even know an accurate answer.

Yes, but what I see here is people already trying to figure out how to game the system. that was my first thought -- our house is in a high SES district, but our summer house is in a place with a shitty school district. Why can't I just have the kid take the exam there over the summer and use that address? That kind of thing. I predict you're gonna see a lot more of that kind of stuff and after Felicity huffman and the rowing machine and all that, people will feel completely justified in gaming the system in this way.

Anonymous wrote:Is it discriminatory to do this? Isn't it meant to essentially prejudice admissions? And how would it work with "need blind" admissions?

Discriminatory against what, or who? The way that they are doing this is completely legal...and will get to race, without ever saying race...making it unlikely to be successfully challenged in court...

I love it...and I'm affluent, and live in an affluent school district...*shrug*

It's fair...

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Judgments based on SES are discriminatory. Maybe it would make sense to include SES for lower scoring students so schools can decide if the score may be due to SES. But including it for high scores has the potential to discount the higher scores of high SES kids. And that that sounds discriminatory. Just as devaluing low SES kids' applications would be discriminatory.

It is discounted! Having a higher SES means you have the resources to pour into that single test- most likely the SAME exact kid with a lower SES status would get a lower test score... so how is SES not part of the equation??

Will they make the income questions on registration mandatory?

What about need blind admission? Food for thought.

On the other hand, colleges would LOVE to have a tool identifying who is and is not a Pell grant recipient for the US News ranking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The adversity score is on a scale of 1-100, and takes into account the following:

Neighborhood environment:
Crime rate
Poverty rate
Housing value
Vacancy rate

Family environment:
Median income
Single parent
Education level
ESL

High school environment:
Undermatching
Curricular rigor
Free lunch rate
AP opportunity

Is this for the school address or the student's address? I'm thinking about Wilson for example; it's in a wealthy part of town but serves a lot of economically disadvantaged students.

The index will measure both the home and school addresses.

So much for parents sacrificing to move into a nice, safe neighborhood with a good neighborhood school. When you can spend half the price and buy in a crappy school system and get your kid into any school they want.

This idea is half baked.

This was not well though through.

This is one GOOD thing about this index. Neighborhood school disparity is one of the worst things about the American educational system. You cannot take credit (and your kid can't take credit) for your kid's life success when it's bought and paid for.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are so many posters suggesting that this is a bad thing for affluent families? It isn’t. It merely levels the playing field. It’s not a zero-sum game.

It doesn’t level the playing field, it creates two very different playing fields. And we must not have the same definition definition of zero sum game.

There are apparently acceptable reasons for scoring lower, and unacceptable reasons. It doesn’t change the fact that those with lower scores don’t perform as well. We can spend all day identifying the reasons, but it doesn’t miraculously make a better student.

But hey, this is America. High expectations are a thing of the past.

Don't perform as well on a test that has little predictive value on college performance beyond first semester/year grades depending on the study. After that point, the impact of SATs flattens out and other factors like ability to handle adversity become more predictive of becoming a good student. SO high SAT scores don't really make a better student either. I don't think the SAT adversity score is a good idea for different reasons (in part because it creates more alternative narratives like the one you are posing about why students are achieving AND I don't trust the college board to get the numbers right and because I think adversity is a far more complex construct than a score for your school) but let's not trick ourselves that upper middle class high SAT scores are really meaningful measures of achievement or provide a good way to differentiate between good students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are so many posters suggesting that this is a bad thing for affluent families? It isn’t. It merely levels the playing field. It’s not a zero-sum game.

It doesn’t level the playing field, it creates two very different playing fields. And we must not have the same definition definition of zero sum game.

There are apparently acceptable reasons for scoring lower, and unacceptable reasons. It doesn’t change the fact that those with lower scores don’t perform as well. We can spend all day identifying the reasons, but it doesn’t miraculously make a better student.

But hey, this is America. High expectations are a thing of the past.

You are an idiot. SATs are an ax, not a scalpel. This new system merely provides needed context for interpreting the scores. The scores themselves won’t change.

It used to be more of a scalpel but David Coleman turned it into an axe. Not sure why. But colleges may like it so they can prioritize social engineering. That said, colleges may be missing the truly exceptional students as more and more students get perfect scores. Perfect scores used to be very rare.