Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 15 Apr '10 09:40
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100413/cm_csm/294145;_ylt=AqH3rGGgrJWmNekoTW7LuBes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFlbTkxNnJ1BHBvcwMyMjAEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9vcGluaW9uBHNsawNjb2xsZWdlYWRtaXM-#mwpphu-container

    http://tinyurl.com/y2erwt6

    College admissions: What matters most -- SAT scores, grades, or just luck?
  2. 15 Apr '10 11:32
    They should just ban this kind of selection and force colleges and universities to select based on grades only.
  3. 15 Apr '10 11:40
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    They should just ban this kind of selection and force colleges and universities to select based on grades only.
    They should select on potential, and all the available evidence suggests that grades alone aren't a particularly good indicator of this.
  4. 15 Apr '10 11:42
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100413/cm_csm/294145;_ylt=AqH3rGGgrJWmNekoTW7LuBes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFlbTkxNnJ1BHBvcwMyMjAEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9vcGluaW9uBHNsawNjb2xsZWdlYWRtaXM-#mwpphu-container

    http://tinyurl.com/y2erwt6

    College admissions: What matters most -- SAT scores, grades, or just luck?
    Colleges should set a general standard of qualifications to eliminate students that are likely to have trouble graduating. If a school wants to be "more selective" or offer especially rigorous courses, they can set the general standards higher - but it should be very clear to everyone what those standards are.

    Once they have a pool of qualified applicants, just choose admissions based on a lottery system. No interviews. No "teacher recommendations". This isn't a beauty pageant.

    The one additional "criteria" would be an applicant's own desire to go to a given college. So if someone didn't get their name called in a given year's lottery, allow them to wait a year and try again the next year, and give that group a preference in the next year's lottery. So if someone REALLY wants to go to a given school, they should be able to get in if they wait long enough.

    Put an end to the silliness where high school kids try to do be on 10 sports teams, participate in 15 clubs, hold 5 different jobs, take only classes they know they can get an A in, and lead an effort to end world hunger - all just to fill their "resumes" with enough stuff to impress some college's admissions staff
  5. 15 Apr '10 11:44
    Originally posted by mtthw
    They should select on potential, and all the available evidence suggests that grades alone aren't a particularly good indicator of this.
    So what do you suggest?
  6. 15 Apr '10 11:48
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    So what do you suggest?
    A combination of the grades plus a consideration of the background they come from/school they went to.
  7. 15 Apr '10 11:54
    Originally posted by mtthw
    A combination of the grades plus a consideration of the background they come from/school they went to.
    Why is that relevant?
  8. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Apr '10 13:53 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100413/cm_csm/294145;_ylt=AqH3rGGgrJWmNekoTW7LuBes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFlbTkxNnJ1BHBvcwMyMjAEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9vcGluaW9uBHNsawNjb2xsZWdlYWRtaXM-#mwpphu-container

    http://tinyurl.com/y2erwt6

    College admissions: What matters most -- SAT scores, grades, or just luck?
    When are these "America’s upper-middle-class teens" in the "leafy American suburb[s]" and, more importantly, their parents, going to learn that:

    a) If you go to graduate school, the identity of your undergraduate school is borderline irrelevant

    b) As long as you get the grades and take the right prerequisites, you can get into a good graduate school, regardless of which undergraduate school you attended

    c) If you don't go to graduate school, you're going to be at a competitive disadvantage against those who did, regardless of where you went to undergraduate school.

    ??

    For example, say Susie Creamcheese wants to be a lawyer. Rather than worrying so much about getting into Dartmouth for undergrad so that Mr. Creamcheese can go into massive debt dropping 200 grand so that Susie can work her tail off competing against 500 other valedictorians who are in her freshman class and so that she can stroll along maple lined stately campuses and stare at the architectural marvels, maybe instead, Susie can go to Podunk State University, spend almost nothing, get excellent grades competing against Joe and Jane Blos, score a 170 on her LSAT and get into Columbia Law School. While in Columbia, she can sit next to Alternate Susie from Dartmouth. Once they both graduate, they'll basically be in the same position to get the same job.


    See, the sad thing about a guy like you is in 50 years you're gonna start doing some thinking on your own and you're gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One, don't do that. And Two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a [expletive] education you could have gotten for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library.

    - Matt Damon's character, Goodwill Hunting
  9. 15 Apr '10 14:44 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sh76
    When are these "America’s upper-middle-class teens" in the "leafy American suburb[s]" and, more importantly, their parents, going to learn that:

    a) If you go to graduate school, the identity of your undergraduate school is borderline irrelevant

    b) As long as you get the grades and take the right prerequisites, you can get into a good graduate school, rega late charges at the public library.[/i]

    - Matt Damon's character, Goodwill Hunting
    Say, Susie Creamcheese (or her parents) just want to brag to all their friends that she got in to Dartmouth and they didn't - and the mere thought of spending time with the peasants at Podunk State would be the worst of humiliations.

    Lots of money has been wasted on such ego-burnishing.
  10. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    15 Apr '10 14:50
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    They should just ban this kind of selection and force colleges and universities to select based on grades only.
    Agreed. If possible don't even consider school grades because different schools have different approaches to grading (more or less lenient).

    SAT + university entry exam (possibly national to allow students to apply to more schools) would be fine by me.
  11. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Apr '10 14:50
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    Say, Susie Creamcheese (or her parents) just want to brag to all their friends that she got in to Dartmouth and they didn't - and the mere thought of spending time with the peasants at Podunk State would be the worst of humiliations.

    Lots of money has been wasted on such ego-burnishing.
    Hey, it's their dime (or two million dimes, as the case may be); they can do what they want with it. But then they shouldn't whine about the system if they eschew easy ways around it.
  12. 15 Apr '10 15:00
    Originally posted by Palynka
    Agreed. If possible don't even consider school grades because different schools have different approaches to grading (more or less lenient).

    SAT + university entry exam (possibly national to allow students to apply to more schools) would be fine by me.
    Yes, I agree.
  13. 15 Apr '10 15:16 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Why is that relevant?
    It gives you a better allround picture. The quality of the school has an effect on results gained at school (if it didn't, people wouldn't waste their money paying for education). So to predict future performance, you have to factor it in.

    For instance, in the UK, research has shown that if a pupil from a school in an inner city comprehensive has the same school grades as a pupil from a private school in a richer area they are likely to substantially outperform them at university.

    If a university wants the best students, they have to consider this.
  14. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    15 Apr '10 15:21 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by mtthw
    For instance, in the UK, research has shown that if a pupil from a school in an inner city comprehensive has the same school grades as a pupil from a private school in a richer area they are likely to substantially outperform them at university.
    That's interesting. Do you have a link/reference?
  15. 15 Apr '10 15:30 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Palynka
    That's interesting. Do you have a link/reference?
    Not offhand, though I'll see if I can dig one up. It's been mentioned in the HE press a few times over the last year or two - a few UK universities started making lower offers to students from certain schools on this basis, and the public-(i.e. private in the UK) school sector was up in arms about it. (Probably on the grounds that parents are paying to give their children an advantage, and they don't get that advantage they might stop paying, though I think they phrased it differently ).

    Edit: here's an article about the debate:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article7078754.ece