I think this might be a little bit bigger than Khan (not Kahn) Academy and some bootstrap-pulling.
2 Likes
Now show IQ by Income and compare
Alternatively, let’s not
13 Likes
One article doesn’t prove a viewpoint. The only way to ascertain this is by doing a prospective study for kids born in households of different incomes and following them till college while providing the same resources The field will never be level. It is the job of the government, the society, and the teachers to at least ensure a semblance of an equal playing field. Someone who works hard today may be able to provide better resources for their family in the future.
Someone in a family that supports them can do better on some tests and genetics may also play a role. So it’s not the fault of the child and they shouldn’t be penalized. In terms of educational resources Khan Academy is unparalleled as long as one has internet access. We need more measures than ECs which can be gamed as well by well-resourced families. Like wise someone endowed with better genetics or resources may be able to do better in athletics or a sport- who is trying to even the playing field there.
1 Like
True, the playing field is never level, in nearly every aspect of life. Privileged kids can hire outside help to boost GPAs, raise SAT/ACT scores, raise AP scores, craft impeccable essays, participate in research, publish creative works, and do other amazing ECs. Unprivileged kids can’t have any of these, some don’t even have time to study. But why only SAT/ACT are made optional/blind? Why not make GPAs, APs, essays, and ECs all optional, all blind, to truly level the playing field?
3 Likes
I don’t disagree with any of your points. I merely addressed a poster who was talking about SAT tests, and limited my comment to that.
1 Like
In case the previous moderator’s note wasn’t clear - move on from discussing IQ. A number of posts were deleted.
1 Like
Also, what of the “privileged” family that chooses not to partake in tutors, test prep (other than free let’s say), expensive ECs, pay-to-play research/internships…? I’m unclear how fair it is to either force these families to partake in these things OR look at them as applicants who “did not take advantage of all that was available to them”. Because of zip code. “Fair” seems to be a moving target, defined behind closed doors.
7 Likes
This is a good point. In my experience of interviewing for an Ivy and being a friend to other parents, most people one might regard as “privileged “ don’t go to these extremes. They are just good parents who encourage good behavior and study habits in the years prior to high school
1 Like
Or you can take income into account when making a decision. I believe UCs already do this.
For some of these, it is fair to say they didn’t take advantage of their opportunities. If they could afford SAT tutoring and take up the opportunity, it is on them for not furthering their child’s education.
For some of these other things (e.g. pay to play research internships, especially nonselective ones) AOs focus less on them because they don’t tend to be an accurate indicator of how skilled an applicant is at research.
Only if you consider SAT tutoring “furthering [one’s] child’s education.” Some who could afford it simply don’t prefer to spend money in this way but would rather spend that money (and time) on actual enriching experiences that expand the student’s horizons and make it possible for them to pursue their passions. I personally don’t think that SAT tutoring is enriches my kids’ education in any meaningful way, and I suspect there are many others who feel the same.
4 Likes
Using that logic, no school tests actually enrich an education either. Given that all the learning happens prior to the test, the tests themselves are a waste of time.
1 Like
Speaking strictly in terms of SAT math here.
You think this way probably because your kids’ math talent is in the 95th, 99th, or 99.9th percentile, where SAT-level problems come easy to them. There is no need for SAT tutoring, as there is little room for them to improve.
However, for kids with “ordinary” math talent — say, those in the 60th–75th percentile — who wish to pursue STEM in college, SAT tutoring can make a meaningful difference, whether they end up taking the SAT or not. The practice time they spend working problems on Khan Academy or UWorld or other test preps goes a long way in getting them ready for calculus and the likes. Math is about recognizing a familiar pattern and knowing how to properly react. Some kids just need to be exposed to the same pattern again and again and again to develop the proper reaction. SAT tutoring offers that opportunity.
3 Likes
I agree, I think depends on if the tutoring is for testing strategies (how to quickly answer questions strategically etc) to get from 1500 to 1540 vs content tutoring getting from 1150-1280 or something where they are really reviewing math concepts AND test strategies. (obviously latter group isn’t competitive for Dartmouth)
2 Likes
My kids are definitely not math kids. They generally test well (D23 did much better on the ACT than the SAT, though – with S26, it remains to be seen), but math is not their strength. They are not pursuing STEM in college. I just didn’t see the point in paying for testing tutors in a TO admissions world, when that money could be spent on, well, anything else.
For my daughter, I just got her an ACT practice book, she spent maybe a couple of hours on it to get the hang of the various types of questions, and that was that. Will do the same with S26.
3 Likes
I disagree, because I see a big difference between standardized tests, which mostly test the ability to take a test, and tests designed for specific courses, which assess content knowledge/skills/achievement of course objectives. I teach, by the way, and I do give exams, and I believe they have some value alongside other kinds of assessments that allow students to play to a range of strengths.
4 Likes
If you don’t want to pay for test tutors, there’s Khan academy, and that’s free for everyone.
2 Likes
which mostly test the ability to take a test
That’s only true once you get to the 1500+ range. But lower than that, and the SAT much more focused on testing your ability in math, writing, reading, etc.
8 Likes