Current Events > SATs to assign "adversity score" to reflect social backgrounds

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/16/us/sat-adversity-score/index.html

The nonprofit group that administers the SAT will assign an adversity score to each student who takes the test to reflect social and economic backgrounds, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.

The move comes amid heightened scrutiny that colleges are facing over the admissions process and the diversity of their student bodies.
"There are a number of amazing students who may have scored less (on the SAT) but have accomplished more," David Coleman, chief executive officer of the College Board, told the Journal. "We can't sit on our hands and ignore the disparities of wealth reflected in the SAT."
---

What a dumb fucking decision.
---

lmao.
---

DarthAragorn posted...

lmao.

---

It won't be told to the student, only universities

That's the part that really gets me
---

isn't that a little condescending? like your lifes been harder than normal so here's some extra points since you can't achieve a good score without em
---

I could see it as perhaps being not a completely stupid idea if it was offered aside of the actual score and was solely based on quality of the school system and household income.

*rolls eyes*
---

Yikes
---

This makes perfect sense. Objectors to weighing factors outside of testing tend to be mostly Asian and white, for many obvious reasons
---

Theyre adding a second score that colleges dont have to consider and students wont see
---

Is it something that is separate or does it mess up the actual score?

Also is it just based on race?

Also no.
---

joe40001 posted...

Is it something that is separate or does it mess up the actual score?

Also is it just based on race?

Also no.

It's a modifier so when a school sees a shitty SAT score they can go "oh, but this person has 10 victim points so we should really give them a consideration bump"
---

Eh

We all die in the end anyway
---

Asian students fleeced again!
---

SAT has always been a joke, ACT is the way to go.
---

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.
---

DarkRoast posted...

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.

Which, like... if a university wants to do that based on application answers, that's one thing, but the SAT is literally supposed to be the objective evaluation portion of that subjective application process. It's the one place where you're supposed to be able to compare 2 people objectively in terms of what they actually know. Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.
---

There was King of the Hill episode about this.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

A post-meritocratic society is the goal.
---

AlephZero posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

A post-meritocratic society is the goal.

That's a dumb fucking goal.
---

I agree.
---

s0nicfan posted...

DarkRoast posted...

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.

Which, like... if a university wants to do that based on application answers, that's one thing, but the SAT is literally supposed to be the objective evaluation portion of that subjective application process. It's the one place where you're supposed to be able to compare 2 people objectively in terms of what they actually know. Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

It doesnt change their SAT score. Its a separate score.
---

DarkRoast posted...

It won't be told to the student, only universities

That's the part that really gets me

Can't go spelling out to people they're basically being given charity. Hurts the self esteem and whatnot if you find out you aren't actually as awesome as people tell you.
---

So glad Im forever done with the college admissions process
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

DarkRoast posted...

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.

Which, like... if a university wants to do that based on application answers, that's one thing, but the SAT is literally supposed to be the objective evaluation portion of that subjective application process. It's the one place where you're supposed to be able to compare 2 people objectively in terms of what they actually know. Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

It doesnt change their SAT score. Its a separate score.

I'm aware. It adds a layer of subjective interpretation to them, though. Do you support this addition?
---

Lordgold666 posted...

Asian students fleeced again!

---

College will soon be free anyways.

Then the robots be doing most of the work.
---

Where was this when I was in high school? I could have gone to Harvard probably.
---

"The SATs, in a country with vastly different levels of primary education, wont be evaluated in a vacuum! Waaahhh!"
---

s0nicfan posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

DarkRoast posted...

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.

Which, like... if a university wants to do that based on application answers, that's one thing, but the SAT is literally supposed to be the objective evaluation portion of that subjective application process. It's the one place where you're supposed to be able to compare 2 people objectively in terms of what they actually know. Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

It doesnt change their SAT score. Its a separate score.

I'm aware. It adds a layer of subjective interpretation to them, though. Do you support this addition?

What subjective interpretation is there? And Im in favor of colleges being given more data that they can choose to use if they see fit, especially if its based on a consistent statistical formula that colleges are allowed to see.

Nothing is being removed and it seems silly to overreact as if SAT scores are changing.
---

lightwarrior78 posted...

DarkRoast posted...

It won't be told to the student, only universities

That's the part that really gets me

Can't go spelling out to people they're basically being given charity. Hurts the self esteem and whatnot if you find out you aren't actually as awesome as people tell you.

Specifically this?

I know I'm not awesome and need the charity
---

Trump's America.

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

DarkRoast posted...

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.

Which, like... if a university wants to do that based on application answers, that's one thing, but the SAT is literally supposed to be the objective evaluation portion of that subjective application process. It's the one place where you're supposed to be able to compare 2 people objectively in terms of what they actually know. Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

It doesnt change their SAT score. Its a separate score.

I'm aware. It adds a layer of subjective interpretation to them, though. Do you support this addition?

What subjective interpretation is there? And Im in favor of colleges being given more data that they can choose to use if they see fit, especially if its based on a consistent statistical formula that colleges are allowed to see.

Nothing is being removed and it seems silly to overreact as if SAT scores are changing.

Right now if two people have a 1200, those are considered equal scores. Under this new system, if two people have a 1200 but different social scores, are those scores still considered equal? What if a person has a higher score but a significantly better social standing, is it still a better score than somebody with a lower score but a significantly lower social standing?

You are perfectly free to claim that this is just more data colleges have access to, although I would even disagree with that statement because the type of information being used by the SAT is information that is already available on college applications. That doesn't mean it doesn't apply subjectivity to what used to be literally comparing two numbers for which one is larger.
---

I mean the test was literally created by a guy who believed black people were inferior

and he actually regretted it and disavowed it
---

This is so dumb >_>
---

s0nicfan posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

DarkRoast posted...

Victimization chic has now reached a point where we literally assign victimization scores to people.

Which, like... if a university wants to do that based on application answers, that's one thing, but the SAT is literally supposed to be the objective evaluation portion of that subjective application process. It's the one place where you're supposed to be able to compare 2 people objectively in terms of what they actually know. Take that away, and you've basically made it impossible to justify why one person was picked over another from a purely merit-based perspective.

It doesnt change their SAT score. Its a separate score.

I'm aware. It adds a layer of subjective interpretation to them, though. Do you support this addition?

What subjective interpretation is there? And Im in favor of colleges being given more data that they can choose to use if they see fit, especially if its based on a consistent statistical formula that colleges are allowed to see.

Nothing is being removed and it seems silly to overreact as if SAT scores are changing.

Right now if two people have a 1200, those are considered equal scores. Under this new system, if two people have a 1200 but different social scores, are those scores still considered equal? What if a person has a higher score but a significantly better social standing, is it still a better score than somebody with a lower score but a significantly lower social standing?

You are perfectly free to claim that this is just more data colleges have access to, although I would even disagree with that statement because the type of information being used by the SAT is information that is already available on college applications. That doesn't mean it doesn't apply subjectivity to what used to be literally comparing two numbers for which one is larger.

Those scores are still equal. Then their social scores are unequal. I dont understand the point of this rhetoric. Colleges have another metric they can decide to use, one that theyve been asking for from the sounds of it.

If students are admitted based on high social scores and they do poorly in college then I think colleges will probably change their admissions. If students are admitted based on high social scores and do well in college and thrive beyond it then I think that will justify colleges using this metric.

I also dont fault any schools that dont take this score into consideration.
---

I'm black and find this stupid
---

I can't wait to see this topic hit 300 posts. What quality discussion we'll all have in the meantime.
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

Those scores are still equal. Then their social scores are unequal. I dont understand the point of this rhetoric. Colleges have another metric they can decide to use, one that theyve been asking for from the sounds of it.

The purpose of the SAT is to evaluate how much somebody knows so that colleges can compare people who may have come from radically different education backgrounds. That's literally what standardized testing is. The point of the rhetoric is that if it any point you start factoring the objective level of knowledge they have against their upbringing, it ruins the purpose of having a straight score that evaluates how much they know. Everything else about the application process is meant to capture those other variables.

Which is better to a University: a higher SAT score from a better social standing, or slightly lower score from a much worse social standing? If the answer to that question isn't objectively the same at every University, then the subjective effect is pretty clear.
---

this is ZERO effect on the SAT scores, people.

chill the fuck out.

it's just another piece of information, which colleges can choose to use or not use. Like anything else, they will use the information to make their subjective judgement as to who gets into their school. it's their right to do so.

The SAT has problems, but this is looking at a car with flat tires and deciding to strap balloons to the roof.
---

Fam_Fam posted...

this is ZERO effect on the SAT scores, people.

chill the fuck out.

it's just another piece of information, which colleges can choose to use or not use. Like anything else, they will use the information to make their subjective judgement as to who gets into their school. it's their right to do so.

It has an effect on admissions, which is the only reason you take the SAT.

So the effect on the score is irrelevant.
---

Fam_Fam posted...

this is ZERO effect on the SAT scores, people.

chill the fuck out.

it's just another piece of information, which colleges can choose to use or not use. Like anything else, they will use the information to make their subjective judgement as to who gets into their school. it's their right to do so.

From the article, quoted directly from the Yale under graduate admissions director:

"This (adversity score) is literally affecting every application we look at," Quinlan told the Journal. "It has been a part of the success story to help diversify our freshman class."

" it doesn't change the number" doesn't actually get at the problem people are having. There is evidence that it is changing how that number is interpreted, and that is the problem.
---

It must really suck to be Asian and face the wrong kind of "adversity" for these college admissions administrators.
---

"social score"

xfd
---

FrisbeeDude posted...

This makes perfect sense. Objectors to weighing factors outside of testing tend to be mostly Asian and white, for many obvious reasons

Like discrimination
---

Paper_Okami posted...

I mean the test was literally created by a guy who believed black people were inferior

and he actually regretted it and disavowed it

What led to him regretting it?
---