Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education United States

University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT (sfgate.com) 285

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Wall Street Journal: The University of California board of regents voted Thursday to stop using the SAT and ACT college admissions exams (Warning: source paywalled; alternative source), reshaping college admissions in one of the largest and most prestigious university systems in the country and dealing a significant blow to the multibillion-dollar college admission testing industry. The unanimous 23-to-0 vote ratified a proposal put forward last month by UC President Janet Napolitano to phase out the exams over the next five years until the sprawling UC system can develop its own test.

The battle against standardized tests has raged for years because minority students score, on average, lower than their white classmates. Advocates argue that the exams are an unfair admission barrier to those students because they often cannot pay for pricey test preparation. [...] Ms. Napolitano's proposal allows four years for the UC system to develop a new exam. If it fails to create or adopt one, then it likely would cease to use any exam, said Robert Schaeffer, public education director of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, known as FairTest, which has fought against standardized testing for 30 years. Mr. Schaeffer said he doesn't believe a new exam will be implemented.
"It appears very unlikely that they will be able to design an instrument that is more accurate and fairer than relying on applicants' high school records," Mr. Schaeffer said. "And, if a new test somehow meets those goals promoters would face massive adoption barriers, including persuading UC and the rest of the admissions world that a third test is truly needed or useful."

A spokesman for the College Board, which oversees the SAT, said the organization's "mission remains the same: to give all students, and especially low-income and first-generation students, opportunities to show their strength. We must also address the disparities in coursework and classrooms that the evidence shows most drive inequity in California."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21, 2020 @10:37PM (#60089016)

    There was a reason they're called the STANDARD APTITUDE TEST.

    Because school systems all had various ways of teaching various subjects and it was a tool colleges used to discern a student's ability in Iowa against one in, say, New York.

    But that doesn't matter now because merit is evil and what really matters is a subjective standard so that the preferred social groups du jour get admitted and less of those undesirable groups that need to be held back until they learn the error of their ways.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by narcc ( 412956 )

      It should be pretty obvious by now that merit has had little to nothing to do with college admissions.

    • by Rob Riepel ( 30303 ) on Thursday May 21, 2020 @11:34PM (#60089120)

      > There was a reason they're called the STANDARD APTITUDE TEST.

      It was never called that. The "S" was always for "Scholastic," and while the "A" started out as "Aptitude" it eventually became "Assessment."

      Of course your comment is well taken as no one, even you, remembers what "SAT" stands for anymore.

    • isn't highschool the standard prep school anyways?
      HOWEVER: if your fucking university costs tens of thousands of dollars per year, you could just let anyone in, it's not like they're not paying for being in. if they pay and don't pass the universitys classes that's on them then.

      what they might actually be fighting against here is that the university itself isn't worth it in the first place.

      • if your fucking university costs tens of thousands of dollars per year, you could just let anyone in, it's not like they're not paying for being in.

        People are paying a high price for exclusivity.

        If they just let anyone in, they wouldn't be able to charge any more than a community college, because the degree wouldn't mean much.

      • by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @02:24AM (#60089454) Homepage

        isn't highschool the standard prep school anyways?

        No. No, it really isn't. As someone who has taken courses at the community college level, it seems to me that your typical high school diploma no longer assures that a student will be ready for a college education. High schools are incentivized to graduate students with acceptable standardized test scores first and foremost, meaning most high school graduates will require remedial education in English language and mathematics to be able to proceed at the proper college level. High school graduates have been trained to take tests, but they don't really know how to function in a classroom environment that requires individual initiative. Even in a class like English 1A, a lot of them really seem lost -- which is only natural when you consider that they have never even been encouraged to do any reading on their own, but only what they've been assigned. A large part of what community colleges do these days is to attempt to fill that gap, but it's a thankless job when a lot of students are really too old to begin a basic education, especially when they have other factors to consider (jobs, family, etc).

        • Even in a class like English 1A, a lot of them really seem lost -- which is only natural when you consider that they have never even been encouraged to do any reading on their own, but only what they've been assigned.

          I'm not disagreeing with the premise of your responses here, but I'm curious how you would encourage the students to read on their own as a teacher, without some form of an assignment?

    • The SAT hasnâ(TM)t been about merit for a long time. I came from a disadvantaged background and took the test once, got 1450/1600. Others in my AP classes faired much worse, could afford to take the test multiple times, pay thousands for test prep and eventually all scored in the 1500s. If privilege can let you brute force from 1100 to 1500, thereâ(TM)s a problem.
  • by NotSoHeavyD3 ( 1400425 ) on Thursday May 21, 2020 @10:45PM (#60089032) Journal
    From the summary it's not that they're against standardized tests, they just don't want to use the current ones like the SAT and ACT. They claim that they're against it because they're biased. However I've got a question, do they have to pay anything to those companies if they use those tests for admissions? I'm so jaded I wouldn't be surprised if the real reason they don't want to use them is because they have to pay to get scores and they figure it'll be cheaper to just develop their own test.
    • Student scores are recorded on their high school transcripts, which the students pay for notarized copies to send to colleges. What they don't say is what biases they found from the testing and what evidence they have the testing is biased. Right now, it is all opinion as argument.
      • Re: Wait a sec (Score:4, Interesting)

        by NagrothAgain ( 4130865 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @12:23AM (#60089184)
        California has addressed their abysmal literacy rate by simply passing students, since the previous method of dumbing down their curriculum wasn't helping kids get their Diploma. This seemed to work on the surface, but it turns out that the kids just kept performing worse and worse on the ACT and SAT exams. And so instead of addressing the root of the problem they cried Racism to increase college acceptance rates. Well, the kids quickly learned they couldn't perform at a college level, so we saw a massive increase in "soft" majors, which in turn led to a shitload of graduates with useless degrees who couldn't leverage them into a paycheck to pay off their loans. And with the chances of a full scale Loan forgiveness and UBI looking dimmer, California and other "progressive" education systems needed a new approach.

        Solution? Ditch the Standardized tests, and find anything to point a finger at. Well, other than fix their broken "no feelings hurt" approach to education.

        Funny thing is, all those rural "flyover" states people like to call dumb and ignorant have some pretty good literacy rates, a large percentage of college attendees, and a very good college graduation rate.

    • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      How about, cough, cough, the spawn of the smart, rich, ugly and greedy combined with the stupid, poor, pretty and greedy (basically the slightly less ugly, slightly more smart, still greedy as fuck and rich) are having real problems with those tests and they want shake and bake tests for the those useless types. Minorities of course will still be screwed.

      The purpose of the fucking tests is not equal access, the fucking purpose is to test for those who will be able to most successfully complete the course.

      • rich ... are having real problems with those tests

        Not true. Rich people send their kids to special prep classes that typically boost SAT scores by 200 points.

        This change is not driven by the rich. They benefit from the current system.

      • the fucking purpose is to test for those who will be able to most successfully complete the course

        Goodhart's law applies to the SAT as well. "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure". The SAT (and IQ tests in general) have been a target for almost a hundred years now.

    • Re:Wait a sec (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Xylantiel ( 177496 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @12:16AM (#60089170)

      Standardized tests were a big step FORWARD for equality. Before them it was trivial to discriminate against kids who were poor or the wrong color because there was no standard. Standardized tests now are racially and economically biased because the pre-college education system is biased in that way. You can't fix that by changing the test. Abandoning standardized tests will just make things even more biased.

      I've always been rather suspicious of organizations pushing this, because the position makes no sense. They don't propose testing reforms or preparation reforms or use of the tests students are already taking in secondary schools, they propose abandoning standardized tests and returning to a system which is known to be more biased against poor people of the wrong color. I really worry that they are sham organizations that exist to bilk donors who don't understand this out of their money.

      Also possible that this reporter got taken in and that UC has no intention of abandoning standardized tests, but is trying to push back against the commercial ones. I'm onboard with that. There is no good reason for a pair of private companies to have this special status in US education. It would make perfect sense for a large university system like the University of California to set their own standard admissions test if they aren't happy with these vendors.

      • Re:Wait a sec (Score:5, Interesting)

        by khchung ( 462899 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @03:36AM (#60089608) Journal

        I've always been rather suspicious of organizations pushing this, because the position makes no sense. They don't propose testing reforms or preparation reforms or use of the tests students are already taking in secondary schools, they propose abandoning standardized tests and returning to a system which is known to be more biased against poor people of the wrong color.

        It is very easy to understand. Those who propose abandoning standardized test WANTED to have bias, bias in a direction they like.

        You see, standardized tests are not giving them the mix of students they wanted (which they will call "diversity"), e.g. there are too many Asians with high scores. IOW, it is not biased in the direction they wanted (whatever that is), and it is very difficult to change the tests to give them their preferred bias. So by abandoning standardized test, they can then pick whatever criteria that will provide the bias they liked, and change it whenever they like.

        • Re:Wait a sec (Score:4, Insightful)

          by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @09:22AM (#60090486) Homepage

          Those who propose abandoning standardized test WANTED to have bias, bias in a direction they like.

          This. It's not politically correct, but let's be honest: They want fewer asians and more blacks selected. Probably also fewer whites and more hispanics, but let's stick to the main two groups for the moment. There are two main reasons for the disparity in test results. These reasons are not PC, so we're not allowed to talk about them. Bet: someone will call me racist for daring to mention them here.

          - Culture. Inner-city black culture: shattered families, parents don't push kids to take school seriously, studying is "acting white", etc. Asian culture: hard work, intact families, parents push kids to take school seriously, to get ahead in life. Result: Asian kids get a lot more out of school.

          - IQ: The IQ of the average asian is a lot higher than that of the average black. Since we aren't allowed to discuss this, we don't really know if the cause is environmental, cultural, genetic, or some combination thereof.

          tl;dr: Addressing the real problems would be difficult. It is a lot easier - and a lot more PC - to say "the tests are biased".

  • by CQDX ( 2720013 ) on Thursday May 21, 2020 @10:46PM (#60089034)

    The UC system has always considered race and economic background in their admission criteria. It's not like they used the SAT and only the SAT to determine admission. To me it sounds like this is a payoff to some favored entity disguised as the new UC standard test creators.

    • In California, it's been illegal to consider race in college admissions since 1996.
    • by _Sharp'r_ ( 649297 ) <sharper AT booksunderreview DOT com> on Thursday May 21, 2020 @11:33PM (#60089118) Homepage Journal

      Not since Prop 209. In 1996 the voters in California amended the State Constitution to prohibit the use of race to discriminate in college admissions, among other parts of government.

      Once it was implemented, minority students in the UC and Cal State systems have achieved much higher graduation rates [nas.org], as they no longer mismatch students to schools that their test scores and grades show they aren't as prepared for.

      This stop using tests plan is just part of an effort by UC Administrators to bypass the State Constitution and figure out ways to go back to discriminating for and against people based on their perceived race by reducing the amount of objective information considered in the admissions process.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        Sounds like a nice change, but something calling itself "National Association of Scholars" could really spare us the right-wing rhetoric. In fact, something calling itself "National Association of Scholars" probably shouldn't have been a partisan group in the first place.
  • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Thursday May 21, 2020 @10:50PM (#60089046)

    This was used in China for about 1500 years until around 1900. It did select officials, a pretty desirable job. Now, in theory this test was completely egalitarian and everybody could take it. In practice, without years of preparation by expensive tutors, you had zero chance of passing and hence the unwashed masses were nicely kept out.

    Most standardized testing is like this to some degree: It can be gamed. The alternative is testing that is very different each year. But that comes with its own problems, in particular that it cannot be done in a general way (it will be specific for specific subjects or subject areas) and it requires really experienced and highly capable test designers and people that grade the test (which almost assures that this fails, because the testers will almost always be the wrong people for the job). It also adds an element of subjectivity, which in litigation-nation is not a good idea.

    • by lgw ( 121541 )

      The Chinese imperial exams were just a class filter though. That's the thing about picking a winner by who writes the best poem: it objectively filters out the lower classes, while leaving the rich-enough-to-be-educated to pick from. The choice can then be made based on weight of bribes and family infuence, and who's to argue with the judges?

      Most standardized testing is like this to some degree: It can be gamed.

      While true, without a doubt. lets assume that no matter what happens the 0.1% get their kids in wherever they like. That still leaves most of admissions open to ever

      • The Chinese imperial exams were just a class filter though.

        That's definitely not true. To begin with, you had to be able to read, and writing poetry means you can write, which is an achievement in itself.

        Secondly a traditional Chinese education involved a lot statecraft, including things like why previous dynasties have failed, how to be a good administrator, starting from the very beginning with the San Zi Jing.

        • Secondly a traditional Chinese education involved a lot statecraft, including things like why previous dynasties have failed, how to be a good administrator, starting from the very beginning with the San Zi Jing.

          I'm not an experted on traditional Chinese education, but I have a hunch that in answering questions like why previous dynasties had failed, you wouldn't get high marks for disagreeing with the current dynasty's positions.

          It's the perennial problem of education (or at least, the western university s

          • I'm not an experted on traditional Chinese education, but I have a hunch that in answering questions like why previous dynasties had failed, you wouldn't get high marks for disagreeing with the current dynasty's positions.

            I don't think a civil service exam is ever going to be the right time to expound your innovative theories on dynastic failure, or innovative theories on anything.

            In ancient China, new theories like that would have been expounded at tea with friends, when deep things were discussed, while looking at nature. Or taught in a monastery as deep knowledge by a monk, and gradually the knowledge would spread widely (if the theory were valuable and practical, or just interesting). Or brought breathlessly to the emp

    • That's still in place in India to gain entry to top-ranked engineering schools. Have a glance at monthly magazines like "Mathematics Times" and "Mathematics Today". Look at their ads for cram schools! I doubt if there are students in any other country in the world that can make it through that material.
    • Follow the money. The trouble is that until last year, rich people could buy spots for their children. Now there are lawsuits all over the place and many of the rich and infamous and their little snowflakes are severely embarrassed. Doing away with the tests, will again allow the rich and infamous to buy spots for their children the old fashioned way - with a large donation.
  • Doesn't matter (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Way Smarter Than You ( 6157664 ) on Thursday May 21, 2020 @10:58PM (#60089060)
    Kids who are unprepared for UC will fail out. You can let in everyone. Just have them all fill out a form and they're in. They won't make it.

    UC isn't like the east coast schools like Harvard or Yale where getting in is the hard part; everyone graduates from those schools.

    UC already fails out a LOT of kids. So sure, let em all in but they're only hurting the ones not prepared for that level of work after they turn around and flunk our the same kids they let in who couldn't get in through the normal means.

    I feel bad for those kids. They'll waste a year of their lives, a lot of money, and feel like shit when they get kicked out.
    • by narcc ( 412956 )

      My experience with UC is very different from what you're describing. The workload was reasonable, maybe even a little light, and given resources were more than adequate. I'm sorry to hear that you had so much trouble. Who knows, maybe they're extra hard on undergrads.

      • We're talking undergrads in this article, grad life has a different focus. As a grad your goal is to make your professor happy enough to eventually sign off on your thesis and get his buddies in the committee to do the same. Entirely different concept.
      • Also, unless it's changed dramatically since I was there, I'm talking about a first year fail out rate of over 30% and a 6 year graduate rate of only 50%. I graduated on time. Over half my class never did.
  • by SmaryJerry ( 2759091 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @12:12AM (#60089164)
    The problem stated with the test is that people who are better prepared for the test score better.... ummm... they want to create a test that can't be studied for?
    • They want one that tests ability, not wallet size.

      • They want one that tests ability, not wallet size.

        Preparation for the SAT, ACT, GRE, GMAT, etc ... requires only a very modest wallet. A $35 book will do. Assuming the student has the personal discipline to read it, do the exercises, do the practice exams, etc. Been there, done that.

        If you can't afford such a book, or lack the discipline to use it, frankly ... you won't make it in college.

    • It looks like they're not going to have a test.
    • A test that can't be studied for was the intent of so-called General Aptitude Tests. And in theory they can't be studied for. But it can be prepared for by growing up among the privileged class. I was once administered an IQ test containing pictures of objects to identify. Included were a shuttlecock and a flatiron. Really, in late 20th century N. America? My examiner didn't even know the term "shuttlecock". She knew it as a "birdy".

      I remember when there was interest in studying "Black English". Whitey here

      • by Jarwulf ( 530523 )
        If you're better prepared by studying more and having more resources and/or better genetics you'll generally do better in tests and life. I'm not sure what magical number they hope to measure thats completely independent of these factors. If you want to bring up the poor performers thats what more attention for stuff like remedial classes in community college is for. Not promoting everybody to the same place just to make them feel better.
      • I was once administered an IQ test containing pictures of objects to identify.

        Thats wasn't an IQ test. Maybe you were lied to, or maybe you are lying, but there is no way that thats an IQ test.

        Is this really what you stains have been going on... misinformation about IQ tests?

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @12:29AM (#60089194) Homepage

    If someone is not prepared for college, then they need to go get their GED, or go take a couple of semesters at a community college, or whatever. Eliminating entrance requirements could result in dropping the quality of education, because first-year instructors won't be allowed to retroactively fix the problem by failing these students.

    As for why more minority students perform poorly on objective tests like the SAT and the ACT? it doesn't matter. Whatever the causes, they occur earlier than college admissions, and must therefore be addressed before college admissions. College is not remedial education.

    Finally, we also continue with the fallacy that every student should go to college. In fact, most kids would be better off heading for a trade. You don't need a college degree to be a construction worker, a welder, a hair dresser, an auto mechanic, or any of a zillion other things.

    • If someone is not prepared for college, then they need to go get their GED, or go take a couple of semesters at a community college, or whatever. Eliminating entrance requirements could result in dropping the quality of education, because first-year instructors won't be allowed to retroactively fix the problem by failing these students.

      And don't forget that California also has a massive Cal State university system, where admissions are pretty easy.

  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @12:32AM (#60089202)
    Standardized tests serve to normalize differences in high school standards. Otherwise a student who gets all A's at an easy high school, has an easier time getting into college than a student who gets all B's at a difficult high school. By having all high school students take the same test, standardized testing lets you see that the second student is much more competent and has learned a lot more than the first student, despite having a worse GPA.

    Nobody claimed the tests were perfect. There is no such thing as perfect - everything has flaws. The question is, if you don't use standardized tests, then how else are you going to normalize for differences in high schools? Unless you can provide a suitable alternative to standardized testing, all you're doing is getting rid of a small bias in the standardized tests, and replacing them with a much larger bias due to differences in high schools.
    • by cowdung ( 702933 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @01:53AM (#60089376)

      In some countries they have a "trial semester" instead of an exam. So you go to class for an entire semester, at the end there are evaluations, and the best students get in. I'm not sure that prevents bias, or is less stressful. But it's something. In the US that could be implemented by having to do a semester in a Community College to prove yourself.

      Another way to do it is the way Georgia Tech did it in their online master's program (MIT and others have since done something similar). You are allowed in, but you have to get a good grade. In a practical sense you could be allowed to take some online courses, and if you do well, that can be used as proof to get in.

      Again, I'm not sure these systems prevent unfair advantage by those that have lots of money. Because you can always throw money at coaching, tutoring or outright cheating. But there are alternatives.

      • by Jarwulf ( 530523 )
        thats great lets have load up the best universities with 100x their capacity with prospective freshmen and then when an unexpectedly high number of students pass the min requirements we'll pull a switcheroo and then dump 99% of the students on their asses on the doorstep across the country from their home. We can call in the Academic Hunger Games.
  • by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @12:40AM (#60089210)
    I'm normally all for testing, but ACT/SAT just suck. These tests are objectively bad for math/physics. They simply bombard students with tons of easy questions only a few seconds to solve each one.

    A much better test would have a smaller number of tasks, but with a much greater complexity. Chinese gaokao is a great example, the current Russian standardized test is also good.
    • These tests are objectively bad for math/physics.

      And yet the faculty representatives who wanted to keep the tests point out that despite their various shortcomings they are still the best predictor of success in college (ie graduation).

      • by Cyberax ( 705495 )
        SAT/ACT results are most definitely not good predictors: https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com] . Apparently, school GPA scores are actually better at this: https://www.educationdive.com/... [educationdive.com]

        It's somewhat intuitively understandable, to get a good GPA score you need to actually do a lot of work (so you need to be able to concentrate and actually do stuff). This translates well into requirements for college graduation - you don't need to be super-smart, you just need to work hard.

        Meanwhile, a trained monkey c
        • by drnb ( 2434720 )
          "The decision, however, ran counter to a recommendation from the system’s faculty senate, which voted in April to keep the SAT and ACT. A faculty task force commissioned to study the impact of standardized tests found that they predict college success within the University of California system more effectively than high school grades or other measures."

          https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0... [nytimes.com]
    • Hmm, don't mention Russia - you will get stoned to death. Russia and Orange Man bad, on Sloshdat.
  • The whole reason for standardized tests to exist is to measure standard performance of students between different schools and different situations. If its your dogma that everybody has the same standard performance and anything showing otherwise is racism there's no point in standardized tests in the first place. So why even both to say you're coming up with new 'better' replacement tests for the SAT and ACT if you're just going to reject them if they work?
  • by Escogido ( 884359 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @02:51AM (#60089532)

    you can either have meritocracy, or you can have universal public education for free (or nearly free), but you can't have both, as they are mutually exclusive. god I feel dumb for having to point this out.

    it seems that in the public mind this concept of equality (or "equity" as they like to call it) being understood as equal access to public services (education is a public service) is somehow compatible with free market based college/uni system. am I the only one who thinks this is a logically impossible construct?

    • by narcc ( 412956 )

      There never has been, and there never will be, such a thing as a meritocracy.

    • by Jarwulf ( 530523 )
      They don't want equal access they want 'equal outcome' or more accurately the same or better outcome in all aspects of life for their pet special interest groups.
  • California:It racist and sexist and homophobic and transphobic that people like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] don't score as highly as everybody who actually studies!
  • Except their time.

    Students with debt so they can have a career is the barrier to entry. If they want equality make access open to all and you pass or fail on the merit of your own abilities and commitment to study.

  • by RobinH ( 124750 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @04:53AM (#60089748) Homepage

    In Ontario (Canada) there is no standardized test that we write before we apply to universities. We just submit our high school grades. That said, some universities keep a database of students' success in their university vs. which high school they came from, and they apply an adjustment factor to the incoming high school grades to compensate for the grade inflation that happens in some high schools. (Toronto, we're looking at you.)

    In Ontario the funding for schools is determined by a formula at the provincial level based on number of students, number of high needs students, and adjustments based on geography (some schools are more expensive to operate based on where they're located). This differs from the US where a significant portion of school funding comes from the local school district so wealthy areas get far more funding per student. So high schools are a little more "equal" to begin with here, at least for funding. Where you see inequality is where experienced teachers get first pick of schools, and they tend to choose the suburban & rural schools with fewer "problem" kids. The new teachers all tend to end up spending a few years at schools in the poorer neighbourhoods. That creates inequality because areas with wealthier families end up with more experienced teachers. So it ain't perfect.

    At any rate, we don't have standardized tests to get into university. It's hardly a big deal.

    • That's really inconvenient for rich people.
      Paying to manipulate SAT/ACT scores is waaaaaaaaaaaaay cheaper than donating enough dough to get a building named after you on campus.
  • Just a few days ago in response to an article here wondering whether colleges were still a meritocracy, I opined that major schools were replacing SAT scores by "stories" in an effort to appear less "racist." People thought I was exaggerating.

    No problem, I suppose. We can just keep having China produce all our Stuff.

  • Um no. Asian kids score higher than evil whitey. So do explain why and how evil whitey managed to create a test that is biased against only certain folk by ethnicity? Impressive really.
  • by Stonent1 ( 594886 ) <stonent@noSpAm.stonent.pointclark.net> on Friday May 22, 2020 @07:27AM (#60090024) Journal
    "minority students score, on average, lower than their white classmates"

    I see millions of Asians raising an eyebrow.
    • "minority students score, on average, lower than their white classmates"

      I see millions of Asians raising an eyebrow.

      "Minority" doesn't mean minority. Minority is shorthand for "black" and "brown". Minority usually doesn't include East Asian or Jewish kids. It's just another language trick to mask uncomfortable issues.

  • That is why the Sate University system is moving away from them - the State's post-secondary education system is covering up for the failure of its primary and secondary education systems. They graduate students that were not ready, and then try to shuffle them into the Universities where they take remedial (high-school) classes for the low-low price of permeant debt.

    At the very heart of this disgrace is the absurd notion that inequities can be resolved by "wagging the dog". A common measure of success for secondary education is the number of students that go on to college. College is seen as the path to generational success. So, idiot policymakers see that and decide sending as many students as possible, regardless of qualification or likelihood of success (most don't finish first year) is a win-win for fixing the problems their incompetence created. They are wrong of course, and their foolish actions do nothing but spread and exacerbate the problems they claim to be fixing.

  • Will be quota (Score:3, Informative)

    by groobly ( 6155920 ) on Friday May 22, 2020 @11:14AM (#60091068)
    The origins of the SAT were to make college entrance more equitable! The idea was to have a test that correlated with college success, and which eliminated favoritism of various kinds in high schools, resulting in essentially meaningless grades, not to mention favoritism in college admissions offices, usually favoring WASPs and legacies.

    Now we are in a new regime where equal numbers are the rule. A court just ruled that UC can be sued because using SAT/ACT "discriminates" against certain favored groups. The California law defines such "discrimination" as a policy which has a disproportionate effect on some favored group, WHETHER INTENTIONAL OR NOT. That means that ultimately, the number of students admitted from each favored group must be proportional to their numbers in the population.

    The most severely negatively impacted group by this will be Asians, who are disproportionately represented in UC admissions more than any other group including so-called "whites."

    This will lead to a decline in the UC system, as good students are forced to go elsewhere, while professors begin to realize that their classes are ever more full of dolts, making UC less attractive to top research and teaching talent.

Maybe you can't buy happiness, but these days you can certainly charge it.

Working...