Who else has a feeling this change is due to internal pressure that there aren't enough domestic applicants that can make the grades?
Gotta have some way to fight back against "Chi-com" influence
Who else has a feeling this change is due to internal pressure that there aren't enough domestic applicants that can make the grades?
Gotta have some way to fight back against "Chi-com" influence
I agree that standardized testing is bad but I really can't imagine that the alternative way Harvard (and the like) will evaluate applicants isn't even worse. (Maybe I'm way off base here).
Right now, it's a combination of 40% grades 40% SAT and 20% extra curriculars. Grades? Harvard and the like weigh those based on the quality of school you go to, and naturally they prefer those who go to the most 'prestigious' schools that cater to the wealthiest in an area. Extra curriculars are mostly always based on opportunity and opportunity is simply not afforded to those with fewer resources. I dunno, as unfortunate as it is to say, aren't SAT scores the most objective way to measure applicants out of all of these? I dunno, not that I give a fuck, but I think that by eliminating this metric it allows these schools further leeway to just discriminate against poorer students.
This is correct. There's a reason Harvard is dropping the SAT and not, say, legacy admissions. This is a financial and PR calculation that they damn well know will not help marginalized students.
nope
While this is true, you have to compare the SAT/ACT to the criteria that will replace it such as grades, extracurriculars, personal essays, and legacy. All of those metrics outside of class rank are even more classist and racist than the SAT.
It's not that the SAT is good (it isn't), but I do think there's a strong case for it being the lesser of two evils and that abolishing it is choosing the greater evil.
I think having something that you sit down and do once kind of helps to round out shit like grades, essays, extracurriculars, etc. like the SAT/ACT are dogshit but it def helped me out as a kid with undiagnosed ADHD and autism and an after school job to have a test I could sit down and do once vs various semesters of missed schoolwork, teachers that hate me, projects, presentations, tests I couldn't study for, etc.
Like it still sucks, and there's still a huge class and race gap for ACT/SAT scores, but IMO they're still at least marginally better at offering a level playing field than every other metric that American colleges use currently.
I think the College Board is pretty fucking evil.
deleted by creator
I know this, this is clear, but then what about the median family income of the high schools of admitted students vs the median family income of those who are not admitted.
deleted by creator
I think grades are a better judgement than SAT scores, since they're ideally tailored to the school itself, and are determined by teachers who are a lot closer to their students. Of course that doesn't mean the decision is for a good reason.