Jump to content

Menu

MIT is going back to requiring scores for 2022-23


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

Interesting that their argument is that test scores open up greater opportunities for diversity and socioeconomic disadvantaged students. 

 

Before this application cycle, I never would have believed that statement as true.

But - wow - BK had to write at LEAST three times the essays that my kids did when they applied to schools. That took a TON of time and if he'd have been carrying a job or didn't have full access to a computer and a willing advisor (me), I don't know how he would have managed it.

We've heard from a couple people in admissions who have said that the extracurriculars, AP classes, etc matter even more with test optional applications. Some programs just looked at the transcript first and if the kid didn't have a lot of APs, they were put in the "no" pile.

BK sent in test scores, but several of his friends went test optional. ALL of them had easy access to testing. Some had scores they didn't like while others just didn't bother to take the test since it appeared to be optional. Many were waitlisted/denied from most schools and all had issues with scholarship $$ or getting into honors/specialized programs without a test score to show. So, while the schools were technically "test optional," many of the programs or scholarships were not.

I think that disadvantaged students have an easier time to gain access to FREE testing prep (Khan Academy is just the first step available out there - libraries carry many of the books, etc) and test dates at their schools than they could gain access to additional AP classes or extracurriculars that they don't have time for if they're working, don't have rides, etc.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

Every single thing they pointed out, we have been saying it here. 
 

Did you see this footnote?  I thought about you when I read it:

Although our analysis is specific to MIT, our findings directionally align with a major study conducted by the University of California’s Standardized Testing Task Force, which found that including SAT/ACT scores predicted undergraduate performance better than grades alone, and also helped admissions officers identify well-prepared students from less-advantaged backgrounds. It is also consistent with independent research compiled by education researcher Susan Dynarski that shows standardized testing can be an effective way to identify talented disadvantaged students who would otherwise go unrecognized. Of course, there may be institutions for whom this research does not hold true, but the findings are very robust for MIT, and have been for many, many years.

⁠I followed the link to the CA study.  It is from 2020.   I guess the PTB didn't like the data from the study so deemed the results irrelevant?  https://senate.ucsd.edu/media/424154/sttf-report-rev-2-14-20.pdf

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

Did you see this footnote?  I thought about you when I read it:

Although our analysis is specific to MIT, our findings directionally align with a major study conducted by the University of California’s Standardized Testing Task Force, which found that including SAT/ACT scores predicted undergraduate performance better than grades alone, and also helped admissions officers identify well-prepared students from less-advantaged backgrounds. It is also consistent with independent research compiled by education researcher Susan Dynarski that shows standardized testing can be an effective way to identify talented disadvantaged students who would otherwise go unrecognized. Of course, there may be institutions for whom this research does not hold true, but the findings are very robust for MIT, and have been for many, many years.

⁠I followed the link to the CA study.  It is from 2020.   I guess the PTB didn't like the data from the study so deemed the results irrelevant?  https://senate.ucsd.edu/media/424154/sttf-report-rev-2-14-20.pdf

Of course they did. People’s opposition to testing is ideological here. 
They completely disregarded what faculty said. It’s like a belief system that must be upheld no matter what. And you can’t argue against it because they will throw at you the word equity, and you know, we must all bow down in front of it, and no more argument can be held because “equity” argument has been used. And if you argue against it, you must be against equity and therefore a despicable human being. 

I firmly support MIT’s argument that many disadvantaged kids might not have access to advanced classes and/or extracurriculars and such… yet a really mathematically talented kid (which is what they are looking for) can easily self study for virtually no money for SAT and knock the socks out of the math section. 
Tests might not tell you everything but it does tell you something. And yes, it tells you something for some institutions. I mean you can get through our local CSU with barely any preparation really, but I bet a kid with a math score of 500 can’t survive UCB engineering program. I mean context is the key. 

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was chatting with my friend last night and she wrote this:

I have a friend who has family deeply rooted in Ivy admission, she just shared with me that is a common consensus thatn many of the campuses the last two freshman classes are most unprepared ever admitted. She inferred they believe the no SAT/AC has failed.

 

Edited by calbear
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, calbear said:

I have a friend who has family deeply rooted in Ivy admission, she just shared with me that is a common consensus that on many of the campuses the last two freshman classes are most unprepared ever admitted. She inferred they believe the no SAT/AC has failed.

The alternative would be to do what UK does - asks for four different AP exam scores. That should work as well. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, calbear said:

Was chatting with my friend last night and she wrote this:

I have a friend who has family deeply rooted in Ivy admission, she just shared with me that is a common consensus thatn many of the campuses the last two freshman classes are most unprepared ever admitted. She inferred they believe the no SAT/AC has failed.

 

Failed for the faculty perhaps. Administrations on the other hand I’m sure are thrilled with the increase in applications, which leads to lowered admit rates, and in turn rises in Us News. All the while being super “equitable. Win win.

I applaud MIT’s honesty but I don’t see other schools following suit. 

Edited by madteaparty
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, calbear said:

Was chatting with my friend last night and she wrote this:

I have a friend who has family deeply rooted in Ivy admission, she just shared with me that is a common consensus thatn many of the campuses the last two freshman classes are most unprepared ever admitted. She inferred they believe the no SAT/AC has failed.

 

I don’t know how Admissions would know - the professors are the ones that have to deal with it. I’ve never quite understood why at many schools it’s a bunch of first jobbers in their twenties who decide whom the profs are charged to educate. In this respect I much prefer the UK system where the profs have some say in the matter.

As for the past couple classes being the most unprepared ever admitted, I haven’t heard that at all. Not.at.all. Emotionally fragile? Absolutely. But I don’t think that’s remotely surprising given the pandemic. 

Edited by bibiche
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

The alternative would be to do what UK does - asks for four different AP exam scores. That should work as well. 

This would exclude a lot of people. I think SAT/ACT scores are great as another data point, but determining merit can’t be all test based.

Edited by bibiche
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bibiche said:

This would exclude a lot of people. I think SAT/ACT scores are great as another data point, but determining merit can’t be all test based.

It is an excellent alternative though. NYU has this system where you can pick either one or the other.

Admissions was never all about tests. Nobody ever determined merit only based on test scores. It was always one among other components, including GPA and extracurriculars. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My whole family was arguing against me a couple of years ago when I said that taking away the SAT was actually worse for disadvantaged students.  I am honestly surprised how little time it took for even one school to backtrack, and while I don't have hopes about the UC's doing it anytime soon, I do hope overall the trend shifts back to the SAT. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

My whole family was arguing against me a couple of years ago when I said that taking away the SAT was actually worse for disadvantaged students.  I am honestly surprised how little time it took for even one school to backtrack, and while I don't have hopes about the UC's doing it anytime soon, I do hope overall the trend shifts back to the SAT. 

CSU has confirmed this month that they are going test optional just like UC. I know many parents who get their kids to apply to a lot more universities because the pandemic and test optional makes them feel even more insecure. It is good business for them. A friend’s son end up applying for mainly privates.

I’m guessing colleges may decide on whether they will stay test optional depending on how their applications trends are. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

It is an excellent alternative though. NYU has this system where you can pick either one or the other.

Admissions was never all about tests. Nobody ever determined merit only based on test scores. It was always one among other components, including GPA and extracurriculars. 

That's simply not true. Automatic merit aid has, largely, been based on test scores. Even when I was a HS student (1990-1994), my PSAT score was enough to earn NASF commended status and a full ride at Texas A&M (and others). Admissions, yes, merit offers...no.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

My whole family was arguing against me a couple of years ago when I said that taking away the SAT was actually worse for disadvantaged students.  I am honestly surprised how little time it took for even one school to backtrack, and while I don't have hopes about the UC's doing it anytime soon, I do hope overall the trend shifts back to the SAT. 

UCs will not backtrack because their goal is to increase the number of hispanic students at the expense of Asian students in the name of equity. Test scores don't allow them to do it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

That's simply not true. Automatic merit aid has, largely, been based on test scores. Even when I was a HS student (1990-1994), my PSAT score was enough to earn NASF commended status and a full ride at Texas A&M (and others). Admissions, yes, merit offers...no.

We are talking about admissions decisions here not scholarships. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, bibiche said:

I don’t know how Admissions would know - the professors are the ones that have to deal with it. I’ve never quite understood why at many schools it’s a bunch of first jobbers in their twenties who decide whom the profs are charged to educate. In this respect I much prefer the UK system where the profs have some say in the matter.

As for the past couple classes being the most unprepared ever admitted, I haven’t heard that at all. Not.at.all. Emotionally fragile? Absolutely. But I don’t think that’s remotely surprising given the pandemic. 

Indeed. There was a freaking pandemic. Lots of students' educations were interrupted and disrupted by the change in course format/delivery and expectations. Making decisions based on that, alone, is insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Roadrunner said:

We are talking about admissions decisions here not scholarships. 

As if the two are unrelated? Please. How many parents tout their child's merit based on the receipt of scholarships?

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roadrunner said:

Of course they did. People’s opposition to testing is ideological here. 
They completely disregarded what faculty said. It’s like a belief system that must be upheld no matter what. And you can’t argue against it because they will throw at you the word equity, and you know, we must all bow down in front of it, and no more argument can be held because “equity” argument has been used. And if you argue against it, you must be against equity and therefore a despicable human being. 

I firmly support MIT’s argument that many disadvantaged kids might not have access to advanced classes and/or extracurriculars and such… yet a really mathematically talented kid (which is what they are looking for) can easily self study for virtually no money for SAT and knock the socks out of the math section. 
Tests might not tell you everything but it does tell you something. And yes, it tells you something for some institutions. I mean you can get through our local CSU with barely any preparation really, but I bet a kid with a math score of 500 can’t survive UCB engineering program. I mean context is the key. 

 

 

How many people do you know did the bolded? Solo? Without family/teacher support? One, five, ten? 100?

MIT is a private institution and can do as it pleases. I support their choices. The idea that this will increase diversity and opportunity based on two/three years of pandemic data tho is stupid.

NO ONE, and I do mean NO ONE ever encouraged me to pursue math. When I went from CA to AR in 10th grade, I lost a full month of class time because school in AR started earlier. Did anyone suggest extra study to make up the difference, provide extra support? No. Repeat that across the country. Pre-determined stereotypes and expectations limit student opportunities and assessment performance everyday, doubly so when classes aren't actually occurring. I'm not shocked by this view, just disgusted. There would be no Katherine Johnson's in your world.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

How many people do you know did the bolded? Solo? Without family/teacher support?

MIT is a private institution and can do as it pleases. I support their choices. The idea that this will increase diversity and opportunity based on two/three years of pandemic data tho is stupid.

The type of kids MIT is looking for? Every one of them. They aren't looking for your child or my child to admit.

 

Yes, MIT is stupid. You know best. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

The type of kids MIT is looking for? Every one of them. They aren't looking for your child or my child to admit.

 

Yes, MIT is stupid. You know best. 

Umm...I don't think you know my child or any other like that but, ok. Math isn't a race. Competence is key. Some students will take longer to reach x, y, z, point and be equally talented. Mastery doesn't necessarily occur quickly, even for those who make significant contributions. This is so narrow-minded. I can't even.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

How many people do you know did the bolded? Solo? Without family/teacher support?

MIT is a private institution and can do as it pleases. I support their choices. The idea that this will increase diversity and opportunity based on two/three years of pandemic data tho is stupid.

How many people do you know did the bolded?
I did.

Solo?
Intellectually solo.

Without family/teacher support?
My teachers supported me in a vague "aim for the stars!" way, but never in a "and I'll help" kind of way.
My parents were incredibly supportive, but did not have the education to help academically at all.

There were very few academic classes or extracurriculars available in my extremely rural school, so I could not wow MIT with AP, Science Olympiad or Model UN experiences. Instead I got ACT and SAT prep books out of the library and got near perfect scores on both exams. I'm sure I did not get in solely based on those scores, but I think they probably did level the playing field a bit.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wendyroo said:

How many people do you know did the bolded?
I did.

Solo?
Intellectually solo.

Without family/teacher support?
My teachers supported me in a vague "aim for the stars!" way, but never in a "and I'll help" kind of way.
My parents were incredibly supportive, but did not have the education to help academically at all.

There were very few academic classes or extracurriculars available in my extremely rural school, so I could not wow MIT with AP, Science Olympiad or Model UN experiences. Instead I got ACT and SAT prep books out of the library and got near perfect scores on both exams. I'm sure I did not get in solely based on those scores, but I think they probably did level the playing field a bit.

Ok...survey of *1* Did you find yourself underwhelmed by students who took longer to reach that milestone/be admitted? TO doesn't mean you *can't* submit scores. It means you don't *have to* submit scores.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Ok...survey of *1* Did you find yourself underwhelmed by students who took longer to reach that milestone/be admitted? TO doesn't mean you *can't* submit scores. It means you don't *have to* submit scores.

If you get 5 responses, will you agree with MIT? Lol. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, madteaparty said:

If you get 5 responses, will you agree with MIT? Lol. 

I will agree when they have non-pandemic data that supports the idea that students who come in without the same test scores can't be brought to that level upon entry. 

There's a set of universities that think their job is only to massage the EXTREME talent that comes through their doors and some that believe their job is to develop *ALL* the talent that comes through their doors, wherever they are.

Neither of my kids would be interested in MIT, one b/c he's a humanities kid and the other b/c she's a people person despite great grades in math ('cept during the pandemic) and I know she's not alone. Using that time frame as a metric for what students can/will do under normal conditions feels like a set up. Folks here are all *KIDS NEED PEOPLE* and *THE PANDEMIC HAS BEEN HORRID FOR MENTAL HEALTH* and then, schools should completely use the last two years as a metric for determining that tests, alone, are an effective measure of merit. It flies in the face of everything, pre-pandemic, that we know about student achievement.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I will agree when they have non-pandemic data that supports the idea that students who come in without the same test scores can't be brought to that level upon entry. 

There's a set of universities that think their job is only to massage the EXTREME talent that comes through their doors and some that believe their job is to develop *ALL* the talent that comes through their doors, wherever they are.

Neither of my kids would be interested in MIT, one b/c he's a humanities kid and the other b/c she's a people person despite great grades in math ('cept during the pandemic) and I know she's not alone. Using that time frame as a metric for what students can/will do under normal conditions feels like a set up. Folks here are all *KIDS NEED PEOPLE* and *THE PANDEMIC HAS BEEN HORRID FOR MENTAL HEALTH* and then, schools should completely use the last two years as a metric for determining that tests, alone, as an effective measure of merit. It flew in the face of everything, pre-pandemic, that we know about student achievement.

So you’re okay with tests otherwise? It’s just this pandemic that has thrown a wrench? But wouldn’t said pandemic hit grades as well? So, no metrics should be used whatsoever due to the…”need for people”?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, madteaparty said:

So you’re okay with tests otherwise? It’s just this pandemic that has thrown a wrench? But wouldn’t said pandemic hit grades as well? So, no metrics should be used whatsoever due to the…”need for people”?

 

I am 100% OK with test optional. Students who shine with their test scores should submit them with pride. I *KNOW* that colleges are going to be seeing and taking into account pandemic conditions for the class of 2022 and the class of 2023. AS THEY SHOULD. These kids have been through the wringer. Public school teachers have been sounding the alarm for months about the delays and issues they're seeing in their students. That has ZERO to do with student capacity and everything to do with pandemic conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Ok...survey of *1* Did you find yourself underwhelmed by students who took longer to reach that milestone/be admitted? TO doesn't mean you *can't* submit scores. It means you don't *have to* submit scores.

I don't understand the bolded question.

What do you mean by taking longer to be admitted? And how I would I know how other students got admitted?

If anything, I would think the other students were underwhelmed by me. I had the academic skills that I needed, but I was missing a lot of other skills. I was a first generation college student who had never been challenged academically. I did not know how to "college" and nobody in my family could help me. That is what MIT developed me in, and what I can now pass down to my kids.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their argument is simple. If you can't handle SAT math, then you probably can't handle our Calculus or Calculus based physics, which we require for every student. Pandemic or not, kids need to be able to handle content. So it's not much to ask those aspiring to MIT to nail algebra. 

I would expect this should be the norm for engineering and math/physics departments. 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wendyroo said:

I don't understand the bolded question.

What do you mean by taking longer to be admitted? And how I would I know how other students got admitted?

If anything, I would think the other students were underwhelmed by me. I had the academic skills that I needed, but I was missing a lot of other skills. I was a first generation college student who had never been challenged academically. I did not know how to "college" and nobody in my family could help me. That is what MIT developed me in, and what I can now pass down to my kids.

This is *exactly* hitting on my point. Test scores provide *1* metric of preparation. The assumption is that admitted students have all met this test score barrier but they, test scores, don't indicate whether a student is able to quickly pick up/remediate missing skills, or confidently access resources to help when they have difficulties. They don't measure grit or people skills. They don't suggest that students with lower scores CANT reach those levels. I *WANT* to see students like you admitted to schools like MIT. I don't think test-required meets that goal, especially using pandemic data alone. I'm open to other, post- and pre- pandemic data.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

Interesting that their argument is that test scores open up greater opportunities for diversity and socioeconomic disadvantaged students. 

12 hours ago, easypeasy said:

Before this application cycle, I never would have believed that statement as true.

This has actually always been the case.  It's just that people prefer to blame the tests than to actually deal with the problems that the tests are uncovering.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, wendyroo said:

I don't understand the bolded question.

What do you mean by taking longer to be admitted? And how I would I know how other students got admitted?

If anything, I would think the other students were underwhelmed by me. I had the academic skills that I needed, but I was missing a lot of other skills. I was a first generation college student who had never been challenged academically. I did not know how to "college" and nobody in my family could help me. That is what MIT developed me in, and what I can now pass down to my kids.

I wanted to add this too b/c we *just* took DS to get his first prep book this weekend. He doesn't do well with online work (including Khan). Both of our kids prefer paper. No one outside this house has mentioned to this kid that test prep is a valuable thing when considering selective schools. No one. He, literally, goes to the library everyday for lunch to read and do homework. NO ONE HAS DISCUSSED THIS WITH HIM. He's not a math kid and will never be but it's not something *any* of his teachers or counselors has seen fit to mention and he flipping has straight As, one B+, and has been invited to the select jazz band. This is while not practicing his instrument and sleeping for three hours everyday after school. And, pls. don't get it twisted. Just b/c I don't indicate  my kids are taking honors or AP in my siggy doesn't mean that's not the case. This isn't a bird-course district either. He *STILL* didn't do well during the pandemic. So, while I appreciate that some students work SUPER hard to improve their scores and demonstrate their worth that way, with guidance/encouragement/prompting, I don't think they should have to, or be penalized for what they don't know and I don't think that's the only measure of merit that should be considered.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EKS said:

This has actually always been the case.  It's just that people prefer to blame the tests than to actually deal with the problems that the tests are uncovering.

Absolutely not. The people demanding tests as the sole measure of merit vote against the adequate and equitable funding of public schools, colleges and universities, circumscribing not only what they teach but how they teach. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Absolutely not. The people demanding tests as the sole measure of merit vote against the adequate and equitable funding of public schools, colleges and universities, circumscribing not only what they teach but how they teach. 

Who's demanding that?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MIT has data from kids they admitted with test scores and without. I am reading this as they are comparing those two sets of kids and finding tests actually told them something. What does pandemic data has to do with it? I mean kids with scores also went through the pandemic. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

MIT has data from kids they admitted with test scores and without. I am reading this as they are comparing those two sets of kids and finding tests actually told them something. What does pandemic data has to do with it? I mean kids with scores also went through the pandemic. 

The pandemic has affected three classes of kids to greater/lesser degrees, both in terms of course content/presentation and test opportunities...2020-1 (largely testing) 2021-2 (testing and instruction), 2022-3 (largely instruction). That's a BFD. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think what doesn't make sense is insisting high math scores or math scores in general for everybody. It makes sense for MIT because of their general university requirements, but what about a school where a philosophy major never has to take math to graduate? I understand why English is a requirement for everybody. But I do think for kids applying to colleges where their select majors don't have math as requirements should be able to substitute SAT scores with something else, like AP scores of their choosing. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Roadrunner said:

I still think what doesn't make sense is insisting high math scores or math scores in general for everybody. It makes sense for MIT because of their general university requirements, but what about a school where a philosophy major never has to take math to graduate? I understand why English is a requirement for everybody. But I do think for kids applying to colleges where their select majors don't have math as requirements should be able to substitute SAT scores with something else, like AP scores of their choosing. 

WHAAAA!!!??? We agree on something? LOL. DS will graduate with multiple APs, starting next year. He will earn his selective college admission regardless of his SAT score. He's working on it anyway tho...b/c he's like that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

WHAAAA!!!??? We agree on something? LOL. DS will graduate with multiple APs, starting next year. He will earn his selective college admission regardless of his SAT score. He's working on it anyway tho...b/c he's like that.

https://www.nyu.edu/admissions/undergraduate-admissions/how-to-apply/standardized-tests.html

 

I like this version, only I would make kids pick an option or a combination of it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

https://www.nyu.edu/admissions/undergraduate-admissions/how-to-apply/standardized-tests.html

 

I like this version, only I would make kids pick an option or a combination of it. 

I'm not opposed. I just think MIT is too quick to drop the COVID accommodations. I'm fine with it for 2022-3 My oldest is just now experiencing the usual junior year stuff. Masks were dropped a month ago and we're about to ramp up for admissions this summer. She wasn't in her school building for all of 2021 and her online classes were a (partial) disaster. This year has been stellar, masks or no masks, in person. I largely trust colleges to evaluate her transcript in that light.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EKS said:

This has nothing to do with what I was talking about.  

These are EXPLICIT demands for test scores as a measure of student merit/worth, if that's not what you meant, please explain.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

These are EXPLICIT demands for test scores as a measure of student merit/worth, if that's not what you meant, please explain.

I wasn't talking about using tests as a sole measure of merit.  I was talking about the general movement toward test optional and test blind that was taking shape before the pandemic even started, which the pandemic accelerated.  Removing test scores from the equation was being used as a way to fix the problem of discrepant test scores between various groups when the problem doesn't come from the tests themselves.  As for what the source of the problem is--I don't think anyone has an answer yet.    

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of where you stand on testing, I feel compelled to point out that it's likely that the next several classes of kids are also going to be comparatively underprepared because they lost a large portion of their high school years to the pandemic - in some areas, two years of in person education, and in most areas two years of enrichment and sports. And whether they test or not and whether they excel on the tests or not, they're going to lack key skills and experiences that other students have had in the past. And that's something that colleges just have to grapple with that has nothing to do with testing or test optional.

Edited by Farrar
  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Farrar said:

Regardless of where you stand on testing, I feel compelled to point out that it's likely that the next several classes of kids are also going to be comparatively underprepared because they lost a large portion of their high school years to the pandemic - in some areas, two years of in person education, and in most areas two years of enrichment and sports. And whether they test or not and whether they excel on the tests or not, they're going to lack key skills and experiences that other students have had in the past. And that's something that colleges just have to grapple with that has nothing to do with testing or test optional.

ITA. Making a decision this quickly feels *VERY* premature to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, EKS said:

I wasn't talking about using tests as a sole measure of merit.  I was talking about the general movement toward test optional and test blind that was taking shape before the pandemic even started, which the pandemic accelerated.  Removing test scores from the equation was being used as a way to fix the problem of discrepant test scores between various groups when the problem doesn't come from the tests themselves.  As for what the source of the problem is--I don't think anyone has an answer yet.    

I agree that test optional was never a way to fix NATIONAL education inequality, just mask it. I don't think reinstating this policy is a way to fix it either. At the end of the day, TONS of talented kids in rural, urban, and suburban environs will be vilified and/or locked out of opportunities because they lack *any* adult willing to say, SAT?ACT? or encourage selective college applications. I find that tragic and unconscionable. Not a win for my kid or any others. Maybe requiring test scores will help selective universities separate the wheat from the chaff in that regard. I got through (as did my friends in similar rural/underprivileged circumstances) so I believe it can be done. I just think it's too soon to return to the status quo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we just completed an on campus admission tour at MIT (last Thursday).  THE admission rep said that technically MIT is (now, was) test optional, the reality is that admitted students had test scores. If there were some spaces left open after taking the test scores, they went through the no test pile. The very few students w/o scores did some extraordinary things. The example given was a student who founded a non-profit and raised big $$$$ to help his community. MIT just removed the veil with the announcement.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, gstharr said:

Well, we just completed an on campus admission tour at MIT (last Thursday).  THE admission rep said that technically MIT is (now, was) test optional, the reality is that admitted students had test scores. If there were some spaces left open after taking the test scores, they went through the no test pile. The very few students w/o scores did some extraordinary things. The example given was a student who founded a non-profit and raised big $$$$ to help his community. MIT just removed the veil with the announcement.

 

It's good information to know about *this school* for those who were/are interested in it. It makes zero difference in the calculus for my kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...