Perhaps those states and schools should fix the k-12 problem instead of hiding it in colleges.
3 Likes
Please move on from discussing CRT or start a new thread. Thank you.
3 Likes
But does that mean that they are ready or should go to one of the most elite universities in the country? This is the part I canât wrap my head around.
These discussions seem to only really revolve around the top universities requiring SAT scores. And while the system is unjust, the
are realistically less prepared for these schools. I struggle to agree that they, instead of the well prepared student, should get in. We have started to penalize kids for attending good school systems.
9 Likes
I wasnât limiting my comments to elite universities, although I know that is the focus/context of many threads on CC. I would call UT Austin a top school, and they believe they should enroll their in-state students who are performing relatively well in underperforming schools.
Same. And then I personally worked with some students with average ACTs who went to top schools and did well.
Yep. And this should concern all of us. Many students are not reading or doing math at grade level, a majority of ACT test takers donât meet college readiness levels, etc. etc.
4 Likes
I like UT and I support its admission system, but keep in mind that system will indeed prevent it from reaching the highest tiers of state schools-it is required to admit too many underperforming students. As a public U, it has made that decision, and that is a reasonable compromise, but it does have a tradeoff. Lots of top Texas high school students have to go out of state, and lots of academically modest students attend UT instead.
7 Likes
There are no easy answers and trade offs for sure. Wisconsin is moving to a system similar to Texasâ, where the top 5% of students at every public HS are guaranteed admission to Madison.
1 Like
@Mwfan1921 has indeed said that K-12 is the problem. I also remember @Mwfan1921 saying that not everyone should go to college, and that some of the disadvantaged kids have teachers who scored 18 on the ACT, which was painful to hear.
With that said, opponents of standardized tests generally donât like to admit that K-12 is the problem. Rather, they wish measuring devices such as the SAT donât exist so the problem is not laid bare.
Instead of encouraging underprepared kids to go to âaverageâ or âabove averageâ colleges which may be a better fit and which is still a big step up in social mobility, they wish the better ones among these kids would go all the way to the top, to âeliteâ colleges, in a single generation. In trying to do so, some of them question the definition of academic excellence, the legitimacy of standardized tests, etc., which seem contrived to me.
A complex problem usually takes time to solve. Perhaps it would be better to slow things down a bit and let this upward movement take longer to materialize, while the underlying K-12 problem gets fixed or alleviated.
6 Likes
This is pretty easy to do in Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin - Madison is only slightly smaller than University of Texas - Austin, but the state of Wisconsin has about 1/5 of the population of Texas. So top 5% of each high school in Wisconsin should fill a smaller percentage of space in University of Wisconsin - Madison than top 6% of each high school in Texas fills at University of Texas - Austin.
In this case, would University of Wisconsin - Madison be able to offer automatic admission to more majors than University of Texas - Austin, where most popular majors do not automatically admit top 6% applicants?
I feel seen 
I agree. Sadly the K-12 problem is so complicated because thereâs no national curriculum, an aging population, and a wide array of funding mechanisms, some of which can disadvantage certain areas in a given state.
I continue to post on threads like this because these issues are complicated, and some people donât understand the details, history, extent of the problem, etc. My understanding isnât perfect of course, but I try to add perspective, especially to posts that seem so certain. My beliefs/preconceived notions about education and opportunity fundamentally changed once I started working with underprivileged HS students.
5 Likes
People keep talking about merit but this to me the opposite of merit: the kids who attend good-to-excellent schools generally did nothing to earn their place there. They got lucky (based on where their parents live or what their parents can pay for). But the kid who attends a subpar urban school and works hard to be top of the class - even if that schoolâs top of the class is closer to the bottom of the class of the excellent school - demonstrates to me far more merit.
If they come in less prepared, but demonstrate the ability to work hard and show promise, I donât have a problem with giving them a chance. To put it in merit terms, I believe theyâve earned that chance.
But the alternative is to keep penalizing kids who attend poor performing schools even though the place attend school is not their choice and no fault of their own.
1 Like
Well slowing it down is exactly what they have tried to do in our K12 schools. The problem with that is itâs abusive to force kids who already fully grasp a level to sit through more years of the same. And itâs abusive to suggest that these kids need to do more group projects hoping somehow their enthusiasm for math rubs off on the kids staring out the window. Also these enthusiasm windows open and shut through childhood. Perhaps this year kiddo is excited about math. And the next itâs soccer or girls or the guitar. The school should be able to strike while the iron is hot and challenge the kids who want to be challenged while the enthusiasm window is open.
2 Likes
Are you saying the kid who is at the top of the class at Exeter is lazy and didnât do anything to earn that spot therefore has no right to go to Harvard?
5 Likes
Who is saying that? I am not at all a fan of standardized tests and will readily admit that K-12 in a problem (I think there is more than just one problem, but I do think K-12 is one of the main ones). Generally I have found others also feel that way: that thereâs not a level playing field in preparation due to K-12. Who does not like to acknowledge that as I havenât personally seen that too often?
Both of these groups of kids are working hard. Kids who are able to keep up with the demanding curriculum at a high rigor HS are working hard. Kids excelling at a subpar HS are also working hard. Thereâs no need to denigrate the first group in favor of the second group.
10 Likes
No, that is not what Iâm saying and not really sure how you got that from I wrote.
Well, you suggested that the student at the underperforming school is more deserving than
1 Like
Sure, if they are doing well at at top school, they are definitely working hard. My point was that where a student ends up in terms of school (excellent, abysmal, or in between) usually has nothing to do with them or their ability (with the exception of schools that have competitive admissions, which of course are a tiny minority of schools in the US, otherwise itâs where your parents live for publics and what they can pay for in privates). The important thing is what they do with what theyâre given, and I believe a hardworking, talented kid from a poor performing school is just as deserving of an excellent college education as a kid who was fortunate enough to win the K-12 lottery and go to a high performing school.
Because they didnât earn their place at a school. For public schools, it is based on where your parents live. For most private schools (I am not talking about schools with competitive admissions, which are a small minority of schools in the US), it is based on whether your parents can pay tuition. Neither one of these privileges was earned by the student. They got lucky to be in that position. That doesnât mean they are lazy - if they do well at their schools, then they obviously are not. But it also doesnât mean they are inherently more deserving, or hardworking, or brighter or demonstrate more promise than a kid who lives in an underperforming district but who worked really hard to get the best education he could despite the limitation imposed on him through no fault of his own.
1 Like
It appears to me in California that the community college system is designed to be a backstop for any high school deficiencies. For one thing, for students who feel uncomfortable with the high school format they can attend 'middle college". And second, if you were unmotivated for whatever reason in HS you have the opportunity to catch up in community college. And if you do reasonably well youâre even guaranteed a spot at a UC after proving youâre serious now. I admire the wisdom of the CA community college system, the UCâs and the Cal States and am in favor of greater funding for all of them.
4 Likes
And we are back to why colleges value the SAT score.
4 Likes