Columbia University to No Longer Require SAT/ACT for Undergrad Admissions

Earl said:
Columbia University is no longer an elite university.

It’s become mediocre.

Why would they do that?

Dumbing down the standards dumbs down the university.
Click to expand...


Does it make you feel like your diploma from Columbia isn't worth as much as it used to be? Getting harder to find jobs with a Columbia University degree?

Also: how is that Ivy League grade inflation (that's been an ongoing problem for many high level universities for DECADES now) going?
 
Nordberg said:
The SATs are being taught for kids of means. They have classes on how to do better. That spreads minority scores from suburban white kids.
Click to expand...

White kids are the only one who come from means in this country? No economically successful black, LatinX or Asian families? No poor white kids? No white kids of means in urban areas?

Interesting perspective.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
That's right. Schools always SAY they're doing a great job. We need to verify that and the SAT is a good way. Make EVERY student take the SAT to graduate from HS and require a score of 500+ on both sections. Just an average score - at least for white students.
Click to expand...

Yes, unlike HS grades, the SAT is a standardized test.

Dems deny Blacks a real education, urge Black mothers to kill their children in the womb, trap Blacks in segregated ghettos, deny Black communities police protection, and Dem policies murder more Blacks in 4 months than the Dem KKK did for its whole existence. And the Dems hate the Jewish State.
 
Nordberg said:
The SATs are being taught for kids of means. They have classes on how to do better. That spreads minority scores from suburban white kids.
Click to expand...

I was an urban kid who attended "how to do better on the SATs" class.
They're readily available, or were in the early 60s, anyway.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I was an urban kid who attended "how to do better on the SATs" class.
They're readily available, or were in the early 60s, anyway.
Click to expand...

I think the key is that they shouldn't be NEEDED to get into a good college. If the high school is failing to get you across the line as measured by SAT or ACT then that's a problem that needs fixing because it creates an undue extra financial burden and the poor are less likely to get access to the additional training.

Your case, notwithstanding, not everyone in urban districts have extra money for that.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
I think the key is that they shouldn't be NEEDED to get into a good college. If the high school is failing to get you across the line as measured by SAT or ACT then that's a problem that needs fixing because it creates an undue extra financial burden and the poor are less likely to get access to the additional training.

Your case, notwithstanding, not everyone in urban districts have extra money for that.
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable point, but I have another.

Regardless of whose fault it is that a person hasn't acquired the correct preparation for college,
is that any excuse to let the unprepared person in?

If something needs to be done to get the unprepared person prepared, I'm perfectly down with that.
But they shouldn't be allowed in unprepared.

I always get called a racist for saying this, but that doesn't make it less true--and I don't mean the me being a racist part.

I've heard people on football and basketball scholarships who cannot utter a grammatically correct declarative sentence.
This should never be with a college student. It diminishes all of us.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
I think the key is that they shouldn't be NEEDED to get into a good college. If the high school is failing to get you across the line as measured by SAT or ACT then that's a problem that needs fixing because it creates an undue extra financial burden and the poor are less likely to get access to the additional training.

Your case, notwithstanding, not everyone in urban districts have extra money for that.
Click to expand...
That is the reason we need school choice.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
That's a reasonable point, but I have another.

Regardless of whose fault it is that a person hasn't acquired the correct preparation for college,
is that any excuse to let the unprepared person in?
Click to expand...

No, but the fix doesn't come from further creating disparity between wealthy and poor.

Columbia dropping the SAT and ACT doesn't necessarily mean unqualified are getting into college.

If something needs to be done to get the unprepared person prepared, I'm perfectly down with that.
But they shouldn't be allowed in unprepared.
Click to expand...

I think the key is that many no longer believe the tests are unbiased assessments of skill or ability. But even if they ARE good at what they are intended to do if they are required and it costs EXTRA to get them then it creates an undue burden on the poor. It will effectively keep the poor out of university. I don't think anyone would agree that poverty makes one incapable of being a useful member of the academic community.

I always get called a racist for saying this, but that doesn't make it less true--and I don't mean the me being a racist part.
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing any racism in your point.

I've heard people on football and basketball scholarships who cannot utter a grammatically correct declarative sentence.
This should never be with a college student. It diminishes all of us.
Click to expand...

And many of those people got into university with an SAT or ACT score. It didn't keep the quality of academic achievement high.
 
ExpressLane said:
That is the reason we need school choice.
Click to expand...

Disagree 100%.

Here's why: free public education is the single greatest invention of the United States. If we open the world up to "school choice" it will destroy free public education (as the rich will get a lifeboat out of underperforming schools) and it will create a much more inequitable society.

If the rich are in the same boat as everyone else they have to be involved and care and pay for the education they want for their kids.

I know the current educational system needs work but that doesn't mean it needs to be abandoned.

And free public education is the ONLY WAY our society moves forward.
 
Phantasmal said:
You have a choice, you may send your child to any school you chose, now, you may even teach them at home.
Click to expand...

This isn't entirely true all the time.

Racial disharmony in Boston grew entirely out of disbanding the popular neighborhood school tradition in order to establish ethnic diversity in school.
It's a miracle that it didn't get the entire city burned down, and on the side of the aggrieved, race had nothing to do it--at first, before the violence.

People not from cities may not have experienced the neighborhood school system.
Everybody walks a short distance to school. No buses needed. It was great. Courts screwing with it was catastrophic.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I was an urban kid who attended "how to do better on the SATs" class.
They're readily available, or were in the early 60s, anyway.
Click to expand...

He’s also stuck in 1960. Whites (and Asians) have been gentrifying cities for several decades now and pushing poverty to the suburbs. This idea of cities being poor and minority and suburbs being all white and well to do is long gone. (although in his defense he’s from Michigan which is an *ss backwards state.)

He also way behind the times because Asians dominate in the SAT/ACT compared to any other race (and many of these Asian kids don’t come from money). I laugh when people who complain about affirmative action say whites are being discriminated against. It’s Asians who get the short end of the stick. They are over represented at elite schools and places like Harvard assign negative points to Asian applicants because if they went by straight grades and test scores Asians would be an even larger portion of the student body.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
Disagree 100%.

Here's why: free public education is the single greatest invention of the United States. If we open the world up to "school choice" it will destroy free public education (as the rich will get a lifeboat out of underperforming schools) and it will create a much more inequitable society.

If the rich are in the same boat as everyone else they have to be involved and care and pay for the education they want for their kids.

I know the current educational system needs work but that doesn't mean it needs to be abandoned.

And free public education is the ONLY WAY our society moves forward.
Click to expand...
If a public school is poorly ran like the Baltimore schools a poor family should have the right to transfer their kids AND the tax dollars that would normally be spent on them to ANY successful school that will take them and their tax dollars. It would get kids out of failing schools and give those failing schools a REAL reason to improve.
 
serendipity said:
So Guano got a janitor's job at a NY college, no doubt he needed positive discrimination to get that.
Click to expand...

Pasty face pimper of Thai whore of name TP literally runs from the king :laugh:


1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top