Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2015 21:56:45 GMT -5
... This is a point that you just cannot defend. Race/class has no bearing on academic ability. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Agreed. However, not all admission decisions are concerned with academic ability. No argument. Some are made based on athletic ability... which race/class have no bearing on. Some are made based on musical talent... which race/class have no bearing on. Some are made based on "Legacy"... which race/class SHOULD have no bearing on (what if Granddad who went to the school lost everything just after paying for Daddy's college and Daddy ended up a poor man by the time Son was born... should Son be excluded from "Legacy" status just because he's poor now? No.). Race and class should have no bearing on admission to a University. None. ETA: there are probably other reasons that I haven't listed... but none of the VALID ones include race or class.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2015 22:00:15 GMT -5
... Granted. However, test scores DO show ability up to the point of the test. ... Tests do show ability to do well on tests. That ability does serve college students well and tends to be a disadvantage for those who don't possess it. I think it is a positive to allow some of those whose brains aren't wired for testing to be in college classes. Agreed... and guess what? That's not limited to race or class either. Poor people and rich people alike can be "wired" to test poorly but excel in the courses themselves (or test well but do poorly in the courses)... as can people of all races.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 13, 2015 23:42:54 GMT -5
And? That has nothing to do with the race or class of the person taking the test. A poor person has just as much ability to use prep tools (if they are made available to them) as a rich one does. And race isn't even a factor. Yeah, if ... (but I live in the actual world where the tools are not affordable to the poor and in which people of color are disportionately represented).The "problem" that you are trying (and failing) to point out isn't solved by automatically giving poor people "bonus points" because they are poor... it's solved by giving poor people the prep tools. Or by taking into account the reality they don't have those tools.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 13, 2015 23:54:38 GMT -5
Tests do show ability to do well on tests. That ability does serve college students well and tends to be a disadvantage for those who don't possess it. I think it is a positive to allow some of those whose brains aren't wired for testing to be in college classes. Agreed... and guess what? That's not limited to race or class either. Poor people and rich people alike can be "wired" to test poorly but excel in the courses themselves (or test well but do poorly in the courses)... as can people of all races. You got it! This is why 20% of admissions are not based on test scores. The 20% are selected as individuals considered holistically. People of all races are considered for that 20%. People of all economic backgrounds are considered. Glad you see that now. Thank you and good night.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2015 23:59:28 GMT -5
And? That has nothing to do with the race or class of the person taking the test. A poor person has just as much ability to use prep tools (if they are made available to them) as a rich one does. And race isn't even a factor. Yeah, if ... (but I live in the actual world where the tools are not affordable to the poor and in which people of color are disportionately represented).The "problem" that you are trying (and failing) to point out isn't solved by automatically giving poor people "bonus points" because they are poor... it's solved by giving poor people the prep tools. Or by taking into account the reality they don't have those tools. You mean the reality that it's unknown whether or not "the tools" would have helped? That reality? Since people that have the prep tools can do just as poorly (or in some cases even worse) on the tests than people that don't have the prep tools, "taking into account they don't have them" seems to me to be unfair at best, and ignorant at worst.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 14, 2015 0:43:21 GMT -5
Or by taking into account the reality they don't have those tools. You mean the reality that it's unknown whether or not "the tools" would have helped? That reality? Since people that have the prep tools can do just as poorly (or in some cases even worse) on the tests than people that don't have the prep tools, "taking into account they don't have them" seems to me to be unfair at best, and ignorant at worst. Yes, with that uncertainty it is good to not base 100% of admissions on that test.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2015 3:10:35 GMT -5
Agreed... and guess what? That's not limited to race or class either. Poor people and rich people alike can be "wired" to test poorly but excel in the courses themselves (or test well but do poorly in the courses)... as can people of all races. You got it! This is why 20% of admissions are not based on test scores. The 20% are selected as individuals considered holistically. People of all races are considered for that 20%. People of all economic backgrounds are considered. Glad you see that now. Thank you and good night. That's not what the University says though. They FREELY admit that they take race and class into account. So I think it's you that actually finally "got it" (even though it doesn't apply at THIS University).
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2015 3:12:06 GMT -5
You mean the reality that it's unknown whether or not "the tools" would have helped? That reality? Since people that have the prep tools can do just as poorly (or in some cases even worse) on the tests than people that don't have the prep tools, "taking into account they don't have them" seems to me to be unfair at best, and ignorant at worst. Yes, with that uncertainty it is good to not base 100% of admissions on that test. No argument... as long as race and class are NOT in amongst the "other criteria" they use.
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Dec 14, 2015 22:03:55 GMT -5
Why not class or income level? Extra-curricular activities and school involvement is always taken as a factor- kind of hard to do if you have to go to a job after school- should that not count as well? Who is the stronger candidate all scores being equal- a student from a poor household that had to bust their ass and overcome odds or some douche that had no job, but their family spent thousands on tutoring and test prep services?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 3:10:48 GMT -5
Because once they get admitted, they can't cut it because they aren't prepared. It's lovely to admit all these people but once they're in, then what? I don't think stupid people should be admitted to college but that's me. I don't want some idiot that got in because they were stupid but the right color that year or the right background to be operating on me or managing my portfolio. I remember when race was a HUGE factor in admittance. All that did was cause minorities who got admitted on their own merit to get lumped in with those who got in based on other criteria. All were discriminated against, even by members of their own criteria. It's not a good plan. There's got to be other ways.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 15, 2015 10:09:16 GMT -5
Because once they get admitted, they can't cut it because they aren't prepared. It's lovely to admit all these people but once they're in, then what? I don't think stupid people should be admitted to college but that's me. I don't want some idiot that got in because they were stupid but the right color that year or the right background to be operating on me or managing my portfolio. I remember when race was a HUGE factor in admittance. All that did was cause minorities who got admitted on their own merit to get lumped in with those who got in based on other criteria. All were discriminated against, even by members of their own criteria. It's not a good plan. There's got to be other ways. Seems like you are equating admissions with graduating. There will be those who don't rise to the opportunity, both in the group that was admitted based on test scores and those admitted using alternative criteria. I agree that "stupid people" should be excluded but I have meet enough people with degrees to not confuse the ability to pass tests with intelligence.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 10:16:06 GMT -5
This is very true about stupid people with degrees. But somehow they got into college and it wasn't by being stupid. I'm sorry but I don't think someone who can't cut it should be admitted because it's a feel good kinda thing. Start off at CC the way others do, due to no money or screwing around in high school. If you can cut it there, then by all means, welcome to the big leagues.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 15, 2015 10:34:12 GMT -5
This is very true about stupid people with degrees. But somehow they got into college and it wasn't by being stupid. I'm sorry but I don't think someone who can't cut it should be admitted because it's a feel good kinda thing. Start off at CC the way others do, due to no money or screwing around in high school. If you can cut it there, then by all means, welcome to the big leagues. If only we had the clairvoyance to know with certainty who will cut it. By the way, there is interesting information out there about the dampening effects on academic achievement that happens in community colleges.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 10:36:29 GMT -5
I know it. Very few go on but thems the breaks. Their choice. At least they didn't keep someone else who might become productive out of a spot.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 15, 2015 10:45:17 GMT -5
I know it. Very few go on but thems the breaks. Their choice. At least they didn't keep someone else who might become productive out of a spot. I have no problem giving some of those who go through the admissions process but have less than the top GPA, test score, and/or extracurricular resume a break and letting them in over the kid with all the advantages of our society who only managed to achieve a point something higher GPA, three more points on the SAT after a private tutor, and/or a long list of extra activities they got to in the car Daddy provided.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 10:50:04 GMT -5
I'm sure you don't. Others feel the same as you. I don't agree. Some agree with me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2015 11:02:38 GMT -5
So zib, you think a rich kid who never had to work and who had lots of cultural advantages and scored a 3.2 gpa and 1250 on their SAT is inherently a better student/risk than a kid who didn't have any advantages, grew up poor, worked to help the family and got a 3.0/1200... It's all about those two numbers?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 11:09:56 GMT -5
What's funny about all of this is that, at least in Florida, you have to have a B average to get 75 per cent of your tuition paid for. Better average? More paid for. I realize not all states are like this but some are. You also have to "volunteer" X amount of hours. Not thrilling but for a free ride, so be it. Most public colleges are close to a lot of areas where people live. You can live at home and basically attend for free. Is it the grand college experience ? No. But if you pick a decent major you can get through and get a job and work your way out of poverty cycle. You can easily manage a part time job and afford a car if transportation is an issue. It may not be your top choice school but I'd be totally pissed if some dumbass got in over my kids who studied and volunteered in high school but they were the wrong whatever. You want to F off in high school? You get a second chance at CC. Make it count.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 11:11:14 GMT -5
So zib, you think a rich kid who never had to work and who had lots of cultural advantages and scored a 3.2 gpa and 1250 on their SAT is inherently a better student/risk than a kid who didn't have any advantages, grew up poor, worked to help the family and got a 3.0/1200... It's all about those two numbers? A rich kid who scores that poorly is going to have to buy their way in somewhere. That won't even get you into Florida state unless you play football.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 15, 2015 16:13:22 GMT -5
... some dumbass got in ... You want to F off in high school? ... Here is where I have a problem. We aren't talking about dumbasses. We aren't talking about kids who didn't put forth effort in high school. We are talking students who didn't make it using standard criteria of GPA and SAT test scores. We are talking about human beings who have convinced a group of professionals that they have what it takes to be successful in college in spite of that fact.
|
|
saveinla
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 2:00:29 GMT -5
Posts: 5,233
|
Post by saveinla on Dec 15, 2015 16:19:58 GMT -5
I'm sure you don't. Others feel the same as you. I don't agree. Some agree with me. Thankfully not all college admissions people agree with you. There is a lot more to a person than their test scores and the admission folks know that. I know a few kids who did very well at school, but could not make it in college because there was no hand holding. They could not handle it and dropped out. So having good grades and a SAT score did not serve them well and somebody else who deserved the spot lost out.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 15, 2015 22:21:37 GMT -5
It's a pretty good indicator. You also have to have recommendations. I know teachers who when asked, said no and why they wouldn't. That was always exciting.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 17:16:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2015 22:26:08 GMT -5
I honestly don't know what sat score ranges are today, lol. Guess I might learn soon.
I had had the second highest sat in my class, graduated only 12 though. The guy who had higher than me was ranked 2nd. I dropped out of engineering because I'd never learned to study so got a teaching degree instead... At least I finished something, other guy dropped out. I don't think two scores mean much of anything actually... A piece of a whole maybe, but certainly not the end all be all...
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 16, 2015 6:18:09 GMT -5
I can remember now a "name" school that always touted how diverse they were sending out letters saying you were accepted starting second semester because they knew there'd be a bunch of flunk outs after one term. So they looked good but knew it was just for show. I almost went to that school but didn't want to wait a few more months to get out of the house.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 16, 2015 9:26:22 GMT -5
I can remember now a "name" school that always touted how diverse they were sending out letters saying you were accepted starting second semester because they knew there'd be a bunch of flunk outs after one term. So they looked good but knew it was just for show. I almost went to that school but didn't want to wait a few more months to get out of the house. Flunk out, home sick, change of mind, etc. I doubt it was only those who made the school "diverse" who.didn't make it back for second semester.
|
|