Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This ruling seemed narrowly focused on the College Board’s inability to offer accommodations for testing this year

Curious why they can't offer accommodations.

Just a guess, but probably fall registration was a mess. The problem with College Board's system is that the high schools hosting are essentially third parties and many of them cancelled because they couldn't (or more likely, couldn't be bothered to) figure out how to host the test under current social distance rules. In California specifically, most schools are not open. Where there's a will, there's a way, but apparently there isn't a will.... Naturally, there were accommodations testers among the many who couldn't register for a test this fall.

If the plaintiffs really wanted accommodations, they should have brought their action against the College Board. Their failure to name College Board as a party speaks volumes about their true intention (get rid of standardized testing). The disability/accommodations angle was merely convenient; without it, the ruling likely wouldn't have happened.

Anonymous wrote:just a preliminary injunction. No way this will stand. This year's admissions decisions have been made, so there's time before next year's class is selected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:not clear from the link whether this was based on State law. Cant be federal law or the Constitution.

Here's a copy of the ruling: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/UCalifSAT-ACT-piRULING.pdf
Unruh Civil Rights Act and Disabled Person's Act (DPA). (I have not looked at this at all, but from context it sounds like the DPA is California's adoption of the ADA.)

Anonymous wrote:not clear from the link whether this was based on State law. Cant be federal law or the Constitution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This ruling seemed narrowly focused on the College Board’s inability to offer accommodations for testing this year

Curious why they can't offer accommodations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are tens of thousands of high school seniors that spent perhaps years studying and taking get classes to do well on the act and sat's. This really changes college admissions for middle class Californians who can't afford private college (donut hole families). I now live in CA and have an 8th grader. I can't afford private college so UC's are his only option. There is a specialized high school program in our city that is competitive and no guarantee of A's or our local high school that isn't as rigorous but I am told easier to get A's since most of the top students go to the specialized high school. Not sure what we will decide.

How many “middle class” Californians were affording the $40k/yr UCs? The middle class kids go to CSUs. I think you mean UMC.

Anonymous wrote:This ruling seemed narrowly focused on the College Board’s inability to offer accommodations for testing this year

Anonymous wrote:Thank the heavens my kids are already in college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of American high schoolers ha r straight As.

DCPS is only giving As and Bs this year. They dropped Cs and below from the grading scale entirely.

This is going to make very student even.

This will cause more colleges to require remedial classes to help students who got an "A" in English in HS but clearly can only write at a 5th grade level. Acceptances will become almost like a lottery, and admitting those students who cannot hack it in higher level institutions will hurt everyone.. These students should be going to community colleges for remedial classes, then transferring to 4 yr universities. By no means do I think that we should not help these kids, but pushing them into situations in which they are not prepared for is doing everyone a disservice.

They should replace the SATs with something else, like maybe a test like cogat or something.

If only admissions officers had a way to know who the good students are without needing a test score... something like knowledge of the schools and the trustworthiness of the guidance recommendations, plus their instincts, which would come with the many years of organizational and personal experience that clearly none of them have...

...oh well, I guess they are now doomed to admit entire classes of unworthy idiots while the truly worthy are denied!

/endsarcasm

You clearly don't know anything about schools in CA to make this statement.

Yes, they know which are "high achieving" schools. And they are mostly white/Asian.

" trustworthiness of the guidance recommendations" - as if guidance recommendations don't have bias.

"instincts" - as if that person who is reviewing the applications don't have any bias

Yes, if they do away with any type of measurable test scores, then what you will see is either more unqualified students attending or less URM being admitted. Look at what happened after Prop 209.

I guess screw the kids who don’t go to “high achieving” schools that have lots of Ap classes, math clubs, debate, naviance (some school districts don’t have naviance or anything similar). Eff the poors!

Anonymous wrote:50% of American high schoolers have straight As.

DCPS is only giving As and Bs this year. They dropped Cs and below from the grading scale entirely.

This is going to make very student even.

Anonymous wrote:This judge sits at the lowest level of California courts. He is just one of the more than 1,500 judges. And he gets to decide the fate of hundreds of thousands of applicants? I am sure some kid with high SAT and low GPAs will appeal this stupid decision.

"The superior courts are the lowest level of state courts in California holding general jurisdiction on civil and criminal matters. Above them are the six California courts of appeal, each with appellate jurisdiction over the superior courts within their districts, and the Supreme Court of California. As of 2007, the superior courts of California consisted of over 1,500 judges"