<p>It seems to me that if the elite colleges sincerely wanted to reduce discrimination, then the first order of business would be to ceased of a flawed testing instrument like the SAT, which has a clear socio-economic bias and also is easily manipulated by students with the resources to retake the test multiple times. Also, it fails utterly to measure or predict elements that are important to long term success, both as a college student and after college. </p>
<p>Therefore, colleges which want to eliminate bias in admissions should either abandon the standardized test entirely, or insist on tests that also will measure other elements important to success. Perhaps they should administer personality tests to all students so as to try to measure those qualities of character that are associated with success: such as internal discipline, goal-orientation, tenacity, etc. A learning styles inventory might help measure important qualities such as students' inter-personal skills and creativity. Probably it would be best to have a longer test, but one that could be administered only once -- so as to eliminate the practice effect which undermines the validity of scores of tests that have been taken multiple times -- any one the the slightest understanding of psychometric testing knows that repeated administrations of a test render the results inherently untrustworthy. Attending prep courses or reviewing test materials should be deemed unethical -- the tests will have far more validity if the students take them cold. (Sounds horrible, but it worked fine in my day -- I never heard of anyone taking a prep course or trying to study or repeating a test.)</p>
<p>The new test should be fine tuned through extensive research so that it is clear that it does not discriminate against any ethnic group or class. If it appears that women do better than men on the test, the test should be modified with more of the questions that men do well with. If it appears that hispanics do better than african-americans on the news test, then of course the test will be modified with more of the type of questions that african-americans do well on. </p>
<p>In the end, there should be a test that allows individual students to be categorized in different ways, but is shown to be entirely unbiased toward any ethnic or social group. At that point, the test can be adopted and used to determine college admissions.</p>
<p>Many people here are misinterpreting what Jian Li is saying. You guys are too focused on the fact that he got a 2400, you're completely missing the point of his case!</p>
<p>Jian said that he did NOT believe that SATs should be the only factor in the admissions process. In fact he said that many other factors should be considered as well, just not race.</p>
<p>In other words, he's not necessarily against a holistic approach, he's just against factoring race into the equation.</p>
<p>I don't see how that leads to a "boring class" unless if you guys are implying that a certain race consists of purely boring "math grinds" who should automatically get deducted points simply because of their race.</p>
<p>I have to disagree with you on the overwhelming emphasis you put on scores on the SAT which is, after all, a multiple choice test. These types of tests do not measure creativity or spontaneity or out of the box thinking -- traits that may be important for a surgeon, for example. Now, I have a decided bias I should admit. My son scored a measly 740 on the Math section in the SAT and for the Math II SAT II (no points for consistency). But his current math teacher, in the highly theoretical post-AP Calc BC couse he's taking, repeatedly remarks on how great my son's proofs are and says he's one of the best students in this top math class. Why does my son suck at SAT math, yet shine in this class -- it's a theoretical class where logic and creative thinking come into play. It's not about "solving the math problem" which may seem important, but ultimately does not tell you who's the better abstract thinker.</p>
<p>In some ways it's no different from the gender issue. I'm very aware my son is at an advantage being a high performing guy with strength in writing. The fact that schools try to achieve gender balance by lowering the standards for guys ARE putting girls at a disadvantage for admissions, but maybe putting the whole school in a better place re: balance.</p>
<p>Race (or gender) in a perfect should have no impact whatsoever in college admission. Reality is, given the SAT score distribution by gender and race, there would be far different look to the college campus compared to the general population if race and gender were never considered. Thankfully gone are the days of 90% white and 90% male tech schools. Lowering standards to achieve balance is not required given the large pool of "qualified' candidates. The top schools have enough 2200+ SAT, 3.9+GPA and amazing EA applicants to allow for a well rounded student body. Will some high achieving students be denied entry? Of course. Is it race or gender discrimination? I don't think so.</p>
<p>Once one stops looking at SAT scores as a signifier of merit, and instead view it as a 3-hour test designed to predict first-year college performance (which it is, with many caveats), the whole argument about representation of any of these schools (where students with 1200-1300 old SAT scores regularly perform well) falls apart.</p>
<p>Admissions folks are very smart people, and have studied outcomes of admissions decisions for decades. Generally speaking, they know what they are doing.</p>
<p>There are countries that do have university admissions tests. They are subject based, and don't resemble the SAT at all. I think many folks, with experience of other countries, conflate the two.</p>
<p>"The top colleges openly admit that race is a factor in admissions."</p>
<p>Of course they do. And they do so primarily for the benefit of white, full-freight customers, because it enhances educational value.</p>
<p>mini,
That's because there's no other way to directly compare two applicants! If you take out standardized testing, then there's no common factor between the applicants to compare.</p>
<p>Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily for standardized tests, but how else would you compare students academically? Schools have different grading systems and students take different classes.</p>
<p>And another thing, if the SAT is such a bad indicator of performance, why is it that you rarely hear about an Asian getting in with a sub 1400 on the old SAT or a sub 2200 on the new one?</p>
<p>Again, SATs should definitely NOT be the only factor in admissions, but race should NOT be a factor at all. Don't change the topic, we're debating whether or not race should be a factor. Not whether or not SATs should play a bigger role.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am wondering the lack of voices of those parents of students like Jian Li on this board. Oh, these parents probably either don't speak English, or work all day at their shops.
[/quote]
Nope. His parents are not unskilled laborers. They live in Livingston. A very wealthy town.</p>
<p>Jian said that he did NOT believe that SATs should be the only factor in the admissions process. In fact he said that many other factors should be considered as well, just not race.</p>
<p>I have a similar view. While I strongly support SATs (and other standardized tests like APs), they are certainly not the only factor.</p>
<p>I simply believe that race should not be a factor whatsoever.</p>
<p>"That's because there's no other way to directly compare two applicants! If you take out standardized testing, then there's no common factor between the applicants to compare."</p>
<p>But you know as well as I do that it is not a common factor. Some folks can afford to take the test 3 and 4 times, and some can't. Some folks spend thousands of dollars on test prep, and some don't. Some have schools that offer test prep for free; others don't. Some attend schools that have more advanced offerings; others don't.</p>
<p>That's why it is a useful tool for predicting first-year performance (some students, no matter how bright, don't have the prep necessary to succeed, unless the college wants to put in the time and money to make it possible for them to do so), but it is NOT a generally useful tool for comparing applicants.</p>
<p>With the old SAT, the CollegeBoard found that a 1300 was simply an 1100 plus $100k in family income. Now that's very useful for prestige colleges that need to ensure a large group of full-freight customers, but it has nothing to do with "merit".</p>
<p>In the early 90s, researchers at the CollegeBoard actually came up with algorithms for "correcting" SAT scores based on expectations given family educational background, family income, and race. It worked. But the CollegeBoard knew that it would raise hackles with their largest group of customers, and so they dropped it, and fired the researcher. (See "The Big Test".)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I personally would rather have the 2400 be my lawyer or doctor or senator given that he isn't an axe murderer than a fabulous squash player, tiddlywinks champion, etc.
[/quote]
I wouldn't necessarily ascribe aptitude in any of these areas to someone with high test scores. I've worked with enough brilliant docs who lacked compassion & bed-side manner, whose egos were so huge that they refused to connect with other professionals working with their patient & blew a diagnosis, to know that for a fact. Lawyers & senators surely need excellent intuition & people skills, no?</p>
<p>The SAT is not a common factor so long as people can prep for it (how can you compare the SAT scores of someone taking it cold, someone who studied from a practice book, someone who took hours of group tutoring, someone who had one on one tutoring)? Plus, how many of these super scores were accomplished by taking the test repeatedly? When my son and his classmates took the SATs in eighth grade (for JHU-CTY eligibility), a few scored 800 on math. Those scores I might give some weight to because none of them prepped in any way and it was a one time deal.</p>
<p>"I simply believe that race should not be a factor whatsoever."</p>
<p>If it weren't, (gender as well), the top schools would end up with a high percentage of Asian males. This is based solely on the race/gender differences in SAT scores. Given that there is no inherent difference in ability by race, would this not be racism against all other groups?</p>
<p>mini,
Economic factors are taken into consideration in the application process as well, so a poor applicant who scores a 2200 on one sitting may be looked upon more highly than a rich one who scores a 2400 after 5 sittings.</p>
<p>Burnthis,
Again, economic factors are taken into consideration. Anyone can spend the time to prep for it if they want. And since extracurics are taken into consideration as well, you can just hole up and study for it 24x7.</p>
<p>akdaddy,
You're taking things to the extreme. Things other than the sat SHOULD be considered, just not race.</p>
<p>My d. had an 800 verbal in eighth grade, one of seven in the nation (and the math was not far behind.) It DID show she was prepared to do college work.</p>
<p>But it had NOTHING to do with merit.</p>
<p>"Economic factors are taken into consideration in the application process as well, so a poor applicant who scores a 2200 on one sitting may be looked upon more highly than a rich one who scores a 2400 after 5 sittings."</p>
<p>Actually, more likely the opposite. The demand for full-freight customers is fierce.</p>
<p>cj3051. there have been other threads on Asian-american student admission at which I and many other Asian-american parents had participated. I think your comment here is rather uncalled for. I have said many times in CC that Asian-Americans are as diverse as other subgroups in this country.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"I simply believe that race should not be a factor whatsoever."</p>
<p>If it weren't, (gender as well), the top schools would end up with a high percentage of Asian males. This is based solely on the race/gender differences in SAT scores. Given that there is no inherent difference in ability by race, would this not be racism against all other groups?[/quote[</p>
<p>Nay, it would not be racism against all other groups.</p>
<p>The policy would be race-blind. How could that possibly be racist if race is not considered?</p>