Hacker News Reader

Comment by kstrauser | Hacker News Reader

That’s not very very and objective when you dig into, though. Take twins separated at birth, raise one in a good school system, and the other in a shoddy one. Guess which is likely to have the higher SAT/ACT, even though they were born with the same abilities.

There are plenty of brilliant kids who made the mistake of being born in the wrong zip code. Something sane and fair would take that into account. Thing is, that’s good for the rest of us, too. I want the best and brightest to be found and educated so they can invent cool things and make my life better. If you reject people just because of their birthplace, you’re drastically limiting the talent pool.

View on HN

Not sure how I feel about this. Should a university be more interested in potential ability, or actual present ability? Should a university have accommodations for rehabilitating someone from a bad school system? I'm all for fixing that bad school system somehow, I just don't see that it's the university's responsibility to lower their standards or offer remedial courses. If the student couldn't achieve a good SAT score because of something lacking in their education, what is the university supposed to do to make up for whatever it is that's lacking? Just let them in and if they fail out then too bad?

Good question, and I don’t know.

As a thought experiment, what if their raw SAT score were replaced with, say, their standard deviations relative to their school or area’s scores? Then you could see that they had high scores compared to their peers, and presumably had the raw talent to succeed?

Going through college admissions with my son right now, one thing they always ask about is "class rank" - that is, out of your graduating class, what percentile were your grades in? Seems like the same basic concept.

You have to use something, SAT/ACT is at least something the individual can act on. A kid from any zip code can apply themselves and improve their chances. Using something like skin color or zip code is not something an individual can act on. It creates a perverse system of discrimination.

True, but I’d contend that a 1400 from a kid in a terrible school district shows way more potential than a 1400 from a kid at a prep school. How do you compare those objectively if the raw number doesn’t tell the whole story?

>If you reject people just because of their birthplace

You rejected one because they had a lower SAT/ACT. It sounds like you want birthplace to be a major factor in admissions though.

> You rejected one because they had a lower SAT/ACT

…due to where they were raised, and not because they were unable to do learn.

> It sounds like you want birthplace to be a major factor in admissions though.

I’m not sure how to address the problem without taking that into consideration.

They are _objective_ -- I think you're advocating _subjective_ criteria; and, you've shifted the criteria from race to socioeconomic status and geography.

It's one thing to account for socioeconomic differences, as they're not based on immutable, inherent traits. Using race, though, is simply and purely racist.

You won't solve perceived "systemic racism" by instituting actual systemic racism.

I’m not advocating anything, because I don’t have answers to this. I just wanted to point out the real problems with supposedly objective criteria: a lot of them are measuring too many variables while aiming to measure only one.

Data scientists deal with this stuff all day long. I’m not one. But maybe it’s time we bring them into the conversation?

I believe U of T has a policy like this where they accept the top x% of students from every high school in the state.

Can confirm (assuming the T in your "U of T" was Texas, not Tennessee). One caveat there is they'll admit you to UT, but they won't necessarily admit you to your preferred major.

That seems like a promising path. Any idea how that’s working out for them?

> Guess which is likely to have the higher SAT/ACT, even though they were born with the same abilities.

Probably the one who went to the better school - but by how much? 10 points? 20?

> There are plenty of brilliant kids who made the mistake of being born in the wrong zip code

Yes, and when they're white it's even worse because they're facing an uphill battle against affirmative action.

You know that the Harvard lawsuit was about Asian kids being held to higher standards than everyone else?

It’s worth privately considering: would your opinion on this change if it weren’t white kids who’d benefit? Don’t answer here, but think about it.

I mean, maybe it’s possible that I’m subconsciously rooting for Harvard to keep its rules in place because they benefit my own kids, who are white. I don’t think so because I didn’t know the details of the lawsuit until very recently, but I admit it’s at least possible. Would you still feel that these rules should be overturned if they hurt your own kids’ chances to go to Harvard?

Well, yes, actually I would. I know, because my children are hispanic and benefit from affirmative action programs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com