The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
College Board Announces Mirror Image of China's Social Credit Score: Adversity Score
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times:

SAT to Add ‘Adversity Score’ That Rates Students’ Hardships

Scoring patterns on the SAT suggesting that the test puts certain racial and economic groups at a disadvantage have become a concern for colleges.

By Anemona Hartocollis
May 16, 2019

The College Board, the company that administers the SAT exam taken by about two million students a year, will for the first time assess students not just on their math and verbal skills, but also on their educational and socioeconomic backgrounds, entering a fraught battle over the fairness of high-stakes testing.

The company announced on Thursday that it will include a new rating, which is widely being referred to as an “adversity score,” of between 1 and 100 on students’ test results. An average score is 50, and higher numbers mean more disadvantage. The score will be calculated using 15 factors, including the relative quality of the student’s high school and the crime rate and poverty level of the student’s neighborhood.

The USA’s College Board is introducing an Adversity Score that’s like a mirror image of China’s new Social Credit score: but in America, the more your family is messed up, the more points you score!

Remember, we always get more of what we measure and incentivize. So, if we reward parents with high Social Detriment scores, we’ll given them an excuse for being bad parents.

The rating will not affect students’ test scores, and will be reported only to college admissions officials as part of a larger package of data on each test taker.

The new measurement brings the College Board squarely into the raging national debate over fairness and merit in college admissions, one fueled by enduring court clashes on affirmative action, a federal investigation into a sprawling admissions cheating ring and a booming college preparatory industry that promises results to those who can pay.

So instead of announcing that they have made reforms to eliminate outright fraud, like hiring an impostor to take the test Ted Kennedy-style, and have made the SAT less vulnerable to big time modern test prep, they’ve announced … what?

Colleges have long tried to bring diversity of all sorts to their student bodies, and they have raised concerns over whether the SAT, once seen as a test of merit, can be gamed by families who hire expensive consultants and tutors. Higher scores have been found to correlate with students from wealthier families and those with better-educated parents.

“Merit is all about resourcefulness,” David Coleman, chief executive of the College Board, said in an interview on Thursday. “This is about finding young people who do a great deal with what they’ve been given. It helps colleges see students who may not have scored as high, but when you look at the environment that they have emerged from, it is amazing.”

A growing number of colleges, in response to criticism of standardized tests, have made it optional for applicants to submit scores from the SAT or the ACT.

Admissions officers have also tried for years to find ways to gauge the hardships that students have had to overcome, and to predict which students will do well in college despite lower test scores.

The new adversity score is meant to be one such gauge. It is part of a larger rating system called the Environmental Context Dashboard that the College Board will include in test results it reports to schools. A trial version of the tool has already been field-tested by 50 colleges. …

He added that the adversity score would not capture individual situations, like a child who was middle class but whose mother was addicted to opioids.

That’s what your college application essay is for …

“Mentally adjusting scores based on where a student came from and what obstacles she overcame is common practice,” Mr. Schaeffer said. “It’s this attempt to do it in a quantitative manner that opens up many other issues.” ….

Universities like Harvard, Yale, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Texas at Austin are also facing challenges to their affirmative action policies, either in the courts or through federal investigations. Many schools are preparing for the possibility that a newly conservative Supreme Court will take a hard line on the use of race in admissions decisions. The College Board says race is not factored into adversity scores.

Careful studies since the 1966 Coleman Report mandated by the 1964 Civil Rights Act have showed that school quality isn’t that big of a driver in test score variance versus the nature and nurture students bring from home.

But, if you ignore 53 years of social science and assume that the reason an 80% black school scores worse overall than a 20% black school, you could rig the numbers in favor of blacks, on average. On the other hand, you’d be punishing black strivers who have sacrificed to get their kids into a less black school. What colleges desperately want are bourgeois blacks, and this system sounds like it won’t do them any good.

By the way, the College Board tried something like this back in 1999. They called it the Strivers program, but it was unpopular and called off.

“I think this is done with at least one eye to the legal considerations that admissions officers are subjected to, the long history of lawsuits about race and ethnicity,” Mr. Hawkins said. …

Yale has used the College Board’s new tool for two admissions cycles, said Jeremiah Quinlan, the dean of undergraduate admissions. He said it provided the same context that Yale has been looking at for decades, but does so in a standardized way across schools and applicants that is very helpful. …

He added, however, that while Yale was seeking race-neutral tools for admission, he did not think they were enough to replace the consideration of race in some cases.

The adversity score is based on data from the Census Bureau, crime data from the F.B.I., and other sources, College Board officials said. It accounts for circumstances like wealthier students going to magnet schools in poorer areas, as well as the reverse.

An anonymous commenter calls our attention to a College Board presentation of its “Environmental Dashboard.” Here race/ethnicity from a low Social Detriment/Adversity score on the left to a high score on the right.

It looks like Asians will get hammered slightly less by this measure than will whites. I wonder how much the fact that Asians don’t like paying for private schools benefits them in this black box measure? Also, it looks like Latinos will benefit more from blacks.

So, just what America needs: more Immigrant Privilege.

My commenter points out that the College Board’s new system makes for a lousier prediction of college GPA.

I have found a College Board presentation on the Environmental Context Dashboard Environmental Context Dashboard: A Scalable, Systematic Approach to Educational Disadvantage that has an important graph on page 42. The graph, entitled “Over (+) or Under ((–) Performance Relative to Predicted GPA* shows that low-adversity students have slightly higher college GPAs (by about 0.1) than what their grades and test scores would predict and the high-adversity students have slightly lower GPAs (by about 0.1) than what grades and test scores predict. So it cannot be honestly said that the adversity score corrects biases present in standardized test scores.

 
Hide 116 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:

    I would guess the next step in this process will involve lowering the difficulty of college-level course work. I mean, they’ll almost have to now that we are more-or-less opening up the door to all applicants through federal student loans and now equalizing SAT scores with adversity point. Everyone gets to go to college, which, of course, means that many can’t do the coursework which will then necessitate either grade inflation or lowering pass scores. That’s similar to what has happened in South Africa where math and other proficiency requirements have been lowered to around 20% over the years. Ultimately, I expect companies to begin placing value on private schools not subjected to this, until the establishment comes for them, too.

  2. The Wall Street Journal also has an article about this:

    SAT to Give Students ‘Adversity Score’ to Capture Social and Economic Background
    New score comes as college admissions decisions are under scrutiny

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/sat-to-give-students-adversity-score-to-capture-social-and-economic-background-11557999000?mod=hp_lead_pos6

    Quote from WSJ article:

    “The purpose is to get to race without using race,” said Anthony Carnevale, director of Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce. Mr. Carnevale formerly worked for the College Board and oversaw the Strivers program.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    The purpose is to get to race without using race,
     
    In theory, you could do a regression analysis that might identify "diamonds in the rough" -- i.e., individuals whose actual ability has been obscured by "adversity," and who therefore overperform in college compared to their high school SATs and GPA.

    But they have been trying to do this forever and they can't ever get the numbers to work out the way they want. Rather, if you honestly look for kids who are likely to overperform, any extra slots go to newly immigrated Asians (and a smattering of poor whites) because they are the only ones who are both poor and smart.

    Using "bad schools" could be a loophole, however, because such schools have low test scores precisely because they are nearly 100% black or hispanic. Thus, they could serve as 'secret' proxies for race itself.
  3. Except in China no Jews are involved.

  4. How soon until Chinese parents divorce, rent in crime ridden neighborhoods, underreport their income, attend the worst public school possible, get on food stamps – so their kids get into Harvard?

    Next year is my guess.

    • Replies: @AnonAnon

    How soon until Chinese parents ... underreport their income
     
    Please, they already do. A lot of them are in cash-heavy businesses. Take a look at the income data for the UCs and compare it to Cal Poly, the whitest public college in California.

    I toured Cal Poly Pomona recently, a commuter college where white kids are less than twenty percent of students. There was a Maclaren driving behind us on campus, and reading the CPP reddit later that day, it turns out it belonged to some rich Chinese kid whose parents parked him in the US for his California-resident bargain-tuition college education. The parking lots were full of fairly nice cars for a minority-dominated commuter school - Mercedes, Lexuses, etc., nicer on the whole than what I've seen in the Cal Poly San Luis Obispo student lots, supposedly the "richest" California public college.
    , @Muggles
    Those Asian kids will also have to have by then juvenile criminal records and an illegitimate kid or two to overcome Harvard's iron "Asian quota" limits. Somebody better alert the Triads.
  5. Right – because we all know adversity raises your IQ!

  6. Environmental Context Dashboard? What the hell does that mean? Hockey up north? Hot lunch down south?

    • Replies: @Olorin
    Sounds like what you hit with your face when AOC's clown car smashes into the wall of reality.
  7. Interesting that this Social Credit Adjustment Mechanism (SCAM) takes into account generic neighborhood “housing values” etc. but skips past a much more important value – family net worth.

    The rating will not affect students’ test scores, and will be reported only to college admissions officials as part of a larger package of data on each test taker.

    This is beyond creepy. Also, how EXACTLY are the scores computed? Will parents need to pay thousands of dollars to cram schools to get the real scoop on how these scores are computed?

    PREDICTION – it will be only a matter of days before college application consultants surface their first advice packages to game the new system, e.g. by moving students into marginal but conveniently accessible high schools for their junior year, faking residence in advantageous (i.e. disadvantaged) neighborhoods, etc.

    • Replies: @Coemgen

    Social Credit Adjustment Mechanism (SCAM)
     
    Nice!
    , @Lockean Proviso
    I see an emerging grey market in ghetto mail drop addresses. Pay someone in the projects $100 per month to get your mail sent to their address, send test letters or packages to make sure that they're not stealing them, then little Allyson can have that prestigious Martin Luther King Drive address that all the smart kids want. Maybe this is also an entrepreneurial income opportunity for minorities.
    , @J.Ross
    The military used to put a negligible little alphanumeric code on DD214s (the paper you show your prospective employer as a kind of resume) which would reveal potentially damning criticisms that were officially secret. I fear this will be something like that job-killing paper whisper.
  8. Our Barbarian Masters ensured us the Rise of China (RICe) would lead to Them becoming more like Us. Only idiots believed this, but since morons dominate our cultural and intellectual institutions the Lie became a Truth.

    Turns out We’ve been becoming more like Them all along.

    Though to be honest, I’d rather live under the Chinese Social Media Score Regime based on some semblance of homogeneous cultural/economic interest than ranked by our Savage Masters in Silicon Valley whose allegiances are anybody’s guess.*

    On a side note: to ensure my children’s place at a Top University, I’ve put them into a foster home run by a Southern Baptist, white, married, heterosexual couple who eat meat, drive pickup trucks, and whose family lines can be traced to slave-owning planters. I dare Harvard to find someone raised under greater adversity.

    * Self censoring to improve my JQ Credit Score.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    NO! Your kids foster parents are descendants of Southern Abolitionists. That will maximize their scores.
    , @Anon
    That's a very silly comment, seeing, form the chart, that the Asians score little on this new metric. It's as if another way to screw the Chinese means, for you, a sign of Chinese privilege.

    You sound as if wouldn't be able to go to college. The fact that you still read articles with charts should count for something. Good Striver!

  9. anon[910] • Disclaimer says:

    I have found a College Board presentation on the Environmental Context Dashboard Environmental Context Dashboard: A Scalable, Systematic Approach to
    Educational Disadvantage
    that has an important graph on page 42. The graph, entitled “Over (+) or Under ((–) Performance Relative to Predicted GPA* shows that low-adversity students have slightly higher college GPAs (by about 0.1) than what their grades and test scores would predict and the high-adversity students have slightly lower GPAs (by about 0.1) than what grades and test scores predict. So it cannot be honestly said that the adversity score corrects biases present in standardized test scores.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    anon [910], *Thanks* for the link to that 45-page slide deck from the College Board on their social credit score initiative (PDF). The page-42 graph that Steve put in the main post ("Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA") is especially informative.

    That graph is meant to re-assure college admissions offices that use of the Adversity Score won't lead to the enrollment of high-Adversity-Score-students who go on to perform poorly in class. It shows that the performance of students from the three most-adverse deciles (8, 9, and 10) earn college GPAs that are only slightly worse than would be predicted on the basis of academic criteria only (high sch00l GPA + AP class performance + SAT score). In numerical terms, the Overall (red) line shows that this cohort's GPA is only 0.1 point lower than predicted.

    However, there are some caveats.

    * The Overall line is the wrong focus, as Adversity Score won't affect admissions decisions at Less Selective Colleges (yellow line) and will barely budge Modestly Selective institutions (green). Highly Selective Colleges (blue) are what elites, NYT editors, and subscribers care about.

    * For Highly Selective Colleges, the three most adverse deciles' college GPA under-performs by 0.18 points. In real life, the underperformance is worse, since these colleges mostly admit students from the left side of the graph. The authors of the deck could have made this clear, but chose not to. Students in the four least-adverse deciles (1, 2, 3, & 4) over-perform by about 0.07. So the relative underperformance of {8, 9, & 10} is about one-quarter of a GPA point. That's three times what the graph purports to show (red line, "Higher adversity is associated with only very small increase in the risk of under-performing on GPA").

    * Unsurprisingly, while the least-adverse decile (1) isn't different from its neighbors, the students in the most-adverse bin (10) do much worse than academic measures alone would predict.

    * There's an important apples-to-oranges elephant in this room. The paywalled WSJ article notes that 15 factors go into the Adversity Score. The College Board won't name them, but Steve reproduced a figure from that article, naming four factors from each of three "Environments": High School, Neighborhood, and Family. The "Family" elements are: Median income, Single Parent, Education level [of parent(s)], and ESL.

    The College Board slide deck on the "Environmental Context Dashboard" explicitly states that the Adversity Score being discussed is based on "Neighborhood and High School Adversity Measures" (slide 10). Slide 11: "A student is tagged with the adversity measures for their high school and neighborhood, which are averaged to create a nationally normed measure between 0 and 100." Slide 12 shows a hypothetical student's "Neighborhood Context Ratings" and "High School Context Ratings." No "Family Context" panel. There is no Family Context component to the "Adversity Score" that's outlined in this College Board deck. It's different from the "Adversity Score" discussed by the WSJ and NYT.

    Bait and switch?
  10. J.Ross says: • Website

    There’s a headline somewhere that thirteen million people have been blacklisted by sesame credit. It’s a Beijing government statistic and I suppose it would be triply impossible to check but still.
    ———–
    SJWs are trying to unperson Alain Delon, who was a greater screen presence than almost any actor now living and certainly better than any of the younger actors. The French however are fighting back.
    Delon interview in which the Samouraï dumps all his social credit on the table and lights it on fire:

    • Replies: @Ragno
    Apropos of absolutely nothing, the missus burned a lifelong torch for Alain Delon. It might have annoyed me if he wasn't so damn cool in LE SAMOURAI, SICILIAN CLAN, ANY NUMBER CAN WIN and half a dozen others.
  11. This means the SAT is now a 1700 point test. For some schools, it might even be 1800, 1900, 2000. They’ll just double or triple this Adversity Index then add to the 1600 base score, i.e. whatever score they need to get to the ethnic composition they desire.

    The message is loud and clear: if you work hard, do well in life, move into a good neighborhood, stay married, be good parents and take care of your kids, you’re a loser and a jackass. America does not give a rat’s ass about people like you. You are a dime a dozen.

    America only cares about two classes of people: 1) rich whites, and 2) blacks of all income levels.

  12. He added, however, that while Yale was seeking race-neutral tools for admission, he did not think they were enough to replace the consideration of race in some cases.

    Adversity score does not discriminate “enough” against Asians and in favor of blacks, because there are lots of 1st generation Asians that would have high adversity scores similar to Latinos – non-English speaking home, low income, low educational achievement for parents, etc. BUT, it will do in a pinch if AA becomes illegal per the S. Ct. This is the next best thing, much “better” than just going by test scores, because so much of the adversity score is a proxy for race.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    Adversity score does not discriminate “enough” against Asians and in favor of blacks, because there are lots of 1st generation Asians that would have high adversity scores similar to Latinos – non-English speaking home, low income, low educational achievement for parents, etc.
     
    I'm trying to figure out how they avoid dinging black kids from backgrounds like Michelle Obama's, who haven't mastered basic grammar by the time they are about to graduate from Princeton.
    , @william munny
    Right. This just does the colleges' racial discrimination work for them. Make it illegal for us to discriminate on the basis of race? We will just work with the SAT people and they will artificially inflate minorities' test scores so their applications falsely indicate they are superior students we just have to have in our school. Less work for us, and no exposure to costly litigation.

    This seems to aim the litigation at the SAT people though. This is just a small step from outright admitting that they are going to score black students' test results higher. And who provides the info that calculates the adversity score?
  13. “Merit is all about resourcefulness”

    I’m excited to see the resourcefulness that Whites and especially Asians will bring to bear in gaming this new metric.

  14. No White kids need apply. This why naive boomer civ Nat stuff is merely a step away from cuckservatism.

    The way to fight this is to demand 75% of all admits are Whites, evenly split between male and female and all mid income and all free.

    As the payment due the War dead.

    Call it the price of heroes. Blacks etc get to fight over 25%.

  15. So instead of announcing that they have made reforms to eliminate outright fraud, like hiring an impostor to take the test Ted Kennedy-style, and have made the SAT less vulnerable to big time modern test prep, they’ve announced … what?

    This was exactly my reaction. When I first saw a link to this, I assumed it must have been to the Onion or another parody news site.

    You’ve just had a huge cheating scandal which involved wealthy, ambitious parents paying people to game the system for their kids…and you’re creating an entirely new elaborate way to game the system?

    If the people in charge of the SAT are this naive, no wonder so much of our society has been taken over by bandits. Imagine a police force staffed by people who can’t conceive of why anybody would want to break the law. They would be constantly thinking to themselves, “can’t everybody see how nice society would be if we would all just obey the rules?”

    • Replies: @Ali
    They would be constantly thinking to themselves, “can’t everybody see how nice society would be if we would all just obey the rules?”
    ---------------Except these same people are likely to be the ones who also say that it's just fine to have illegal aliens who break laws.
  16. Mark Soane said, “The SAT was the last bastion of objective measurement in the sea of subjectivity that makes up a college application.”

    You can add 200 or 300 points to the SAT score of every black and hispanic applicant if you want. It’s essentially what we’ve been doing anyway. But when they arrive at Princeton or Yale (or even USC), they’ll still be unable to do the work, much less handle the workload. They’ll all go Jerelyn Luther in some way or other, and stage hate-crime hoaxes in order to get the attention and disruption they crave.

    I’ve the uncomfortable feeling that our ‘cultural leaders’ will consider this a ‘win-win’.

  17. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:

    They are forcing every parent in America to plot and scheme how to get around this outrageously corrupt and stupid system.
    They are harming our kid’s lives and it is just a game they play in their shallow virtue-signaling closed little elite world.
    The sooner this country falls apart the better. I’ll take chaos over corruption.

  18. Some immigrant kids with high SAT scores will be “gaming” the adversity score, i.e. committing fraud.

    How hard will it be to get a cheap ghetto address for a bunch of parents to share and to file their taxes from? Use your poor immigrant aunt’s address if you don’t want the expense. And it is easy enough to claim that you are from an ESL family or that your parents have no college degrees from the old country. These inputs into the score are not easily auditable.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    "23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 were sent by the IRS to ‘Unauthorized’ Aliens at a single address in Atlanta"

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-sent-46378040-refunds-23994-unauthorized-aliens-1-atlanta-address

    Alas, there's no interview with the USPS letter carrier.

  19. @PiltdownMan
    Some immigrant kids with high SAT scores will be "gaming" the adversity score, i.e. committing fraud.

    How hard will it be to get a cheap ghetto address for a bunch of parents to share and to file their taxes from? Use your poor immigrant aunt's address if you don't want the expense. And it is easy enough to claim that you are from an ESL family or that your parents have no college degrees from the old country. These inputs into the score are not easily auditable.

    “23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 were sent by the IRS to ‘Unauthorized’ Aliens at a single address in Atlanta”

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-sent-46378040-refunds-23994-unauthorized-aliens-1-atlanta-address

    Alas, there’s no interview with the USPS letter carrier.

    • Replies: @68W58
    I usually lurk here on iSteve, but this paragraph from your link caught my attention:

    “Perhaps the most remarkable act of the IRS was this: It assigned 6,411 ITINs to unauthorized aliens presumably using a single address in Morganton, North Carolina. According to the 2010 Census, there were only 16,681 people in Morganton. So, for the IRS to have been correct in issuing 6,411 ITINS to unauthorized aliens at a single address in Morganton it would have meant that 38 percent of the town’s total population were unauthorized alien workers using a single address.”

    I live in Morganton (in the county actually, but close enough) and there should be no way that 6400 tax returns could come through our little post office without someone noticing. Is there any way that the address was used for electronic returns without physical checks being sent via the mail? We have a large Guatemalan population here who first came to work in a chicken processing plant in the 90s, but not a lot of crime. There’s been nothing about this in the local media so far (our local paper is owned by Berkshire Hathaway).

  20. @Jack D

    He added, however, that while Yale was seeking race-neutral tools for admission, he did not think they were enough to replace the consideration of race in some cases.
     
    Adversity score does not discriminate "enough" against Asians and in favor of blacks, because there are lots of 1st generation Asians that would have high adversity scores similar to Latinos - non-English speaking home, low income, low educational achievement for parents, etc. BUT, it will do in a pinch if AA becomes illegal per the S. Ct. This is the next best thing, much "better" than just going by test scores, because so much of the adversity score is a proxy for race.

    Adversity score does not discriminate “enough” against Asians and in favor of blacks, because there are lots of 1st generation Asians that would have high adversity scores similar to Latinos – non-English speaking home, low income, low educational achievement for parents, etc.

    I’m trying to figure out how they avoid dinging black kids from backgrounds like Michelle Obama’s, who haven’t mastered basic grammar by the time they are about to graduate from Princeton.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    Have you ever listened to WHITE Gen-Zers talk, or read their posts?
  21. Assuming this will be good for property values in gentrifying neighborhoods. Why not buy the cheap run-down house in the bad area when it helps the college application? At least the people stuck in white working class neighborhoods will start to earn their own Pokémon points when enough minorities end up there after getting squeezed out. Until the rules move against them.

    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    I live in an affluent town with a high ranking public high school. A fair portion of the few renters here are people who move into the area so their kids can attend high school and then move somewhere else once they have graduated. This also includes parents who send their kids to private schools for primary education but wanted to round them out and get normal socialization with regular (white) kids.

    You could see another type of gentrification where parents move specifically to area that has a high enough adversary scores to where getting in a top college would be a shoe in. Right now gentrification comes largely from childless hipsters and gays who don't have a stake in the schools but that could change.

  22. @J.Ross
    There's a headline somewhere that thirteen million people have been blacklisted by sesame credit. It's a Beijing government statistic and I suppose it would be triply impossible to check but still.
    -----------
    SJWs are trying to unperson Alain Delon, who was a greater screen presence than almost any actor now living and certainly better than any of the younger actors. The French however are fighting back.
    Delon interview in which the Samouraï dumps all his social credit on the table and lights it on fire:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB0TLuSo00k

    Apropos of absolutely nothing, the missus burned a lifelong torch for Alain Delon. It might have annoyed me if he wasn’t so damn cool in LE SAMOURAI, SICILIAN CLAN, ANY NUMBER CAN WIN and half a dozen others.

  23. It looks like Asians will get hammered slightly less by this measure than will whites.

    Shocker. It’s just another tool to f*ck over whites being admitted to the most competitive colleges. If you live in California you’re already living this reality with regards to the UCs (and they’re starting to make inroads at Cal Poly) – if you’re white, especially a white male, you need to be a superstar to get into the good UCs – I’ve heard more than a few stories about kids who didn’t get into UCSB for engineering but are admitted to Purdue, a much higher ranked program. If you’re a white Californian you might as well plan for the extra expense for your kid to go out of state. My first child took the ACTs because the SAT decided to change the test his junior year (and, at the time, it seemed less vulnerable to cramming/cheating but no longer, it seems) but now the rest of my kids will use the ACT exclusively – there is no reason not to, all colleges take both tests.

    • Replies: @Fred C Dobbs
    UCSB was about +/- 85% White when I was there late 70s early 80s. It was considered (and still is) a relatively safe place to send your suburban whelps.

    Last I checked I think White percentage was in the high 30s.

    I wonder if there's another decent sized school in the country that has seen such a yuuuuge demographic shift in 40 years?
    , @Anon
    UCSB isn't a party school anymore?
  24. @Eagle Eye
    Interesting that this Social Credit Adjustment Mechanism (SCAM) takes into account generic neighborhood "housing values" etc. but skips past a much more important value - family net worth.


    The rating will not affect students’ test scores, and will be reported only to college admissions officials as part of a larger package of data on each test taker.
     
    This is beyond creepy. Also, how EXACTLY are the scores computed? Will parents need to pay thousands of dollars to cram schools to get the real scoop on how these scores are computed?

    PREDICTION - it will be only a matter of days before college application consultants surface their first advice packages to game the new system, e.g. by moving students into marginal but conveniently accessible high schools for their junior year, faking residence in advantageous (i.e. disadvantaged) neighborhoods, etc.

    Social Credit Adjustment Mechanism (SCAM)

    Nice!

  25. @Ibound1
    How soon until Chinese parents divorce, rent in crime ridden neighborhoods, underreport their income, attend the worst public school possible, get on food stamps - so their kids get into Harvard?

    Next year is my guess.

    How soon until Chinese parents … underreport their income

    Please, they already do. A lot of them are in cash-heavy businesses. Take a look at the income data for the UCs and compare it to Cal Poly, the whitest public college in California.

    I toured Cal Poly Pomona recently, a commuter college where white kids are less than twenty percent of students. There was a Maclaren driving behind us on campus, and reading the CPP reddit later that day, it turns out it belonged to some rich Chinese kid whose parents parked him in the US for his California-resident bargain-tuition college education. The parking lots were full of fairly nice cars for a minority-dominated commuter school – Mercedes, Lexuses, etc., nicer on the whole than what I’ve seen in the Cal Poly San Luis Obispo student lots, supposedly the “richest” California public college.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    This. How are these geniuses supposed to defeat the white patriarchal conspiracy when they can't figure out immigrant welfare scamming and tax under-reporting?
    Oh, right, because white people are voluntarily helping them every step of the way.
  26. @Eagle Eye
    Interesting that this Social Credit Adjustment Mechanism (SCAM) takes into account generic neighborhood "housing values" etc. but skips past a much more important value - family net worth.


    The rating will not affect students’ test scores, and will be reported only to college admissions officials as part of a larger package of data on each test taker.
     
    This is beyond creepy. Also, how EXACTLY are the scores computed? Will parents need to pay thousands of dollars to cram schools to get the real scoop on how these scores are computed?

    PREDICTION - it will be only a matter of days before college application consultants surface their first advice packages to game the new system, e.g. by moving students into marginal but conveniently accessible high schools for their junior year, faking residence in advantageous (i.e. disadvantaged) neighborhoods, etc.

    I see an emerging grey market in ghetto mail drop addresses. Pay someone in the projects $100 per month to get your mail sent to their address, send test letters or packages to make sure that they’re not stealing them, then little Allyson can have that prestigious Martin Luther King Drive address that all the smart kids want. Maybe this is also an entrepreneurial income opportunity for minorities.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I'm going to start a Rick Singer College Opportunity Academy charter school in Compton, which will consist of a P.O. Box. Moms will be thanking me in their Emmy acceptance speeches.
  27. Andy says:

    So this, like all similar programs, is basically choosing the bad and incompetent in favor of the good and competent. At what point this starts hurting US competitiveness against it rivals, like the Chinese, who has a 2,000 year old tradition of picking the best people for its jobs? Is it by chance that the US is already losing the tech competitiveness in favor of China in some areas? (see the rise of Huawei, for instance)

    • Agree: Andy
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    At what point this starts hurting US competitiveness against it rivals
     
    Sometime in the early 70s, by my estimation. About the time that real wages flatlined.
  28. @Mr McKenna
    "23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 were sent by the IRS to ‘Unauthorized’ Aliens at a single address in Atlanta"

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-sent-46378040-refunds-23994-unauthorized-aliens-1-atlanta-address

    Alas, there's no interview with the USPS letter carrier.

    I usually lurk here on iSteve, but this paragraph from your link caught my attention:

    “Perhaps the most remarkable act of the IRS was this: It assigned 6,411 ITINs to unauthorized aliens presumably using a single address in Morganton, North Carolina. According to the 2010 Census, there were only 16,681 people in Morganton. So, for the IRS to have been correct in issuing 6,411 ITINS to unauthorized aliens at a single address in Morganton it would have meant that 38 percent of the town’s total population were unauthorized alien workers using a single address.”

    I live in Morganton (in the county actually, but close enough) and there should be no way that 6400 tax returns could come through our little post office without someone noticing. Is there any way that the address was used for electronic returns without physical checks being sent via the mail? We have a large Guatemalan population here who first came to work in a chicken processing plant in the 90s, but not a lot of crime. There’s been nothing about this in the local media so far (our local paper is owned by Berkshire Hathaway).

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    Yeah, I think your theory is pretty likely. It's sort of what I was implying with my crack about the letter carrier. No USPS employee would tolerate anything of the kind! Most likely it all got loaded onto EBT cards, or their functional equivalent.

    PS: At first glance, I figured your moniker was an address in Manhattan. So much for unfounded assumptions!

    , @PiltdownMan

    Is there any way that the address was used for electronic returns without physical checks being sent via the mail?
     
    Sure. The IRS can issue refunds by direct deposit. e-filing and online/wire transfers are commonplace now, and likely the norm. I daresay most people simply don't bother anymore with paper returns, statements, notifications or cheques for any aspect of their financial lives. Certainly, no one under the age of 45 or so, opts for it from some sense of security, if they opt for it at all.
  29. The status quo is that race is the de facto adversity score; this system can hardly be worse than that. The biggest losers relative to the current system would seem to be privileged blacks.

  30. @AnonAnon

    It looks like Asians will get hammered slightly less by this measure than will whites.
     
    Shocker. It's just another tool to f*ck over whites being admitted to the most competitive colleges. If you live in California you're already living this reality with regards to the UCs (and they're starting to make inroads at Cal Poly) - if you're white, especially a white male, you need to be a superstar to get into the good UCs - I've heard more than a few stories about kids who didn't get into UCSB for engineering but are admitted to Purdue, a much higher ranked program. If you're a white Californian you might as well plan for the extra expense for your kid to go out of state. My first child took the ACTs because the SAT decided to change the test his junior year (and, at the time, it seemed less vulnerable to cramming/cheating but no longer, it seems) but now the rest of my kids will use the ACT exclusively - there is no reason not to, all colleges take both tests.

    UCSB was about +/- 85% White when I was there late 70s early 80s. It was considered (and still is) a relatively safe place to send your suburban whelps.

    Last I checked I think White percentage was in the high 30s.

    I wonder if there’s another decent sized school in the country that has seen such a yuuuuge demographic shift in 40 years?

    • Replies: @AnonAnon
    UCSB is 36% white and is the most white UC. The entire California system has changed significantly but, surprising to me, Johns Hopkins is only 36% white. That's right around UC levels and has to be among the most diverse non-California colleges in the US.
    , @Prof. Woland
    In once sense, this is why our parents built the UC system in California. In the 60's and 70's, higher education was a birthright. Some children excelled and went to the top schools while others got in somewhere after either a mediocre high school education or took a few years off before going to college. Nowadays, it is clear that it is part of a racial spoils system, many of whom had nothing to do in any way with its founding.

    This is one of the big reasons new schools are not being built in California in spite of the fact that the population is surging. One of the appeals of a national university system is that the best and brightest go on to become the scientists, doctors, and managers who later run society so all people benefit even if they could not get into one of the limited slots. But the way it is now, people pay for colleges their kids will never qualify for on racial grounds and the end product are politically correct idiots who you hope you don't run in to when they have graduated.
  31. I’m just shocked. Shocked and saddened.

    Any normal person (myself, I guess) would have thought the SAT pretty straightforward……how many questions correct, how many wrong, how many un-answered. Maybe they weight some questions as more difficult than others, so they probably jack with that as well, but it’s a SCORE, at least.

    Then leave it to the schools to play their goofy games AFTER the raw data comes in.

    This? This is just insanity.

  32. @Lockean Proviso
    I see an emerging grey market in ghetto mail drop addresses. Pay someone in the projects $100 per month to get your mail sent to their address, send test letters or packages to make sure that they're not stealing them, then little Allyson can have that prestigious Martin Luther King Drive address that all the smart kids want. Maybe this is also an entrepreneurial income opportunity for minorities.

    I’m going to start a Rick Singer College Opportunity Academy charter school in Compton, which will consist of a P.O. Box. Moms will be thanking me in their Emmy acceptance speeches.

  33. well, that’s it then. the SAT has hit rock bottom. it’s function as a test is now over.

    steve, allow me to make a major post.

    i’m not sure why this research never occurred to me before, but i’m going to post something long here. the college board didn’t make this research easy, so i had to dig for a while to collect all this information. i didn’t feel like going back further into the past than i did, because it was a hassle to assemble all this info, and every step backwards got more and more annoying due to difficulty of information collection.

    like many things, the decline of the SAT can actually and quite easily be traced by the history of the person in charge of the organization. in this case, the president of the college board. which previously was known as the college entrance examination board. tracing who the president of the college board was over the years, makes it easy to see what happened.

    when the prototype version of what we call the SAT today was first developed in the 1920s, it is pretty obvious that it was all boring, stodgy, serious european men who were actual genius level researchers and experts at what they did. and they produced one of the greatest written tests ever devised by man. it’s ability to sort people into different ability levels is legendary. and it actually worked.

    unfortunately, like most things, this didn’t last.

  34. @Fred C Dobbs
    UCSB was about +/- 85% White when I was there late 70s early 80s. It was considered (and still is) a relatively safe place to send your suburban whelps.

    Last I checked I think White percentage was in the high 30s.

    I wonder if there's another decent sized school in the country that has seen such a yuuuuge demographic shift in 40 years?

    UCSB is 36% white and is the most white UC. The entire California system has changed significantly but, surprising to me, Johns Hopkins is only 36% white. That’s right around UC levels and has to be among the most diverse non-California colleges in the US.

  35. If your boyhood in Harlem was hell,
    We invite you to come to Cornell!
    It’s your ivied escape.
    (Don’t cheat and don’t rape;
    But if so, we’ll contrive not to tell.)

    • LOL: Eagle Eye
  36. How long before Chinese and the Hollywood celebrities learn how to game the social credit score?

    • Replies: @Paul
    I guess I got the terminology wrong. In the United States, it should not be called the "social credit score," but rather the "adversity score."
  37. The ACT is adding a similar score, per this tweet from a Daily Caller reporter: https://twitter.com/RachelStoltz/status/1129047604657086464

    I frankly don’t understand why they’re bothering. Colleges already give weight to the high school you graduate from. I’m sure they have zipcode data, too. I hope they get sued. This can’t be legal.

  38. now, i didn’t have time to go back and check every president of the college board over time, because they made it hard to figure this stuff out, so i only went back to the 70s, which is also fine, because that’s when things started to change anyway. dates may be off by 1 year or so. without further discussion, here are the presidents of the college board, since 1972 or so:

    sidney marland 1972/73-1979. president of what was then called the college entrance examination board. a liberal who served under nixon, a vocal opponent of school segregation who seemed to like to threaten to send guys with rifles to force old school southerners to admit africans to their public schools. marland also served in the prototype version of what eventually became the US department of education.

    marland published a well known document in 1972 called the marland report, an open attack on intelligence, where he sought to redefine giftedness as a broad range of abilities, instead of just being about intelligence. his views would be in direct opposition to a man such as lewis terman.

    george hanford 1979-1986. the beginning of the change in earnest. hanford served at the college board for 30 years, and was probably some kind of suck up, like NFL commissioner goodell today.

    facing constant attacks that the SAT discriminated, hanford opened commissions starting in 1980 to study whether it was in fact biased against various groups. hanford did defend the SAT as fair, and as something which could identify high ability vibrant-americans based on their test performance alone, offering them a better future, versus a future where standardized testing was eliminated and those diamond in the rough kids would never get into a college. nevertheless, after years of working with people attacking the SAT, he probably deliberately hired –

    donald stewart 1986-1999. a mulatto who was president of spelman college from 1976-1986. he’s the guy who did the most damage. basically a one man campaign against the SAT and standardized testing in general, exactly as you would expect. first he changed the name of the test. then the re-center of the test, to lower the ceiling.

    gaston caperton 1999-2012. a democrat from west virginia. the idiot who added the essay. a zero, nothing person. standard issue educrat. around this time is when the ACT began to supplant the SAT. for now obvious reasons.

    (david coleman) 2012-2019. i don’t think we need to say anymore. first he ruined the test. eliminated a century’s worth of work developing good SAT questions, replacing them with crap. now he will simply add bonus points for vibrant people, as jews have always wanted to do.

    over the decades, we observe the leftist position being taken to it’s ultimate conclusion. a great thing created by european men passes thru several hands, moving steadily leftward, until eventually a jewish guy controls the entire enterprise, and he ruins it in total. almost everything works this way, and this could be said to be the social science version of gravity. all social things move from european man to jewish man in a linear fashion.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    Why didn't you just quote the chorus from Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit"?
    , @haddox
    Thanks dude. This was enlightening. And all too familiar.
  39. On the other hand, you’d be punishing black strivers who have sacrificed to get their kids into a less black school. What colleges desperately want are bourgeois blacks, and this system sounds like it won’t do them any good.

    I’m trying to figure out how they avoid dinging black kids from backgrounds like Michelle Obama’s, who haven’t mastered basic grammar by the time they are about to graduate from Princeton.

    Programs designed to get more black students into elite institutions unwittingly punish middle-class American native blacks. On one hand, these blacks aren’t smart enough to compete on merit for slots against the children of African and Caribbean immigrants. And on the other hand, middle-class American native black families aren’t screwed up enough to be helped by programs like the SAT’s Diversity Score.

    Look at Michelle Obama’s children. Despite being the daughter of the President of the United States and a double legacy, Malia Obama only got into Harvard because of the Z-Plan which requires below average admits take a gap year between high school and college. It was announced on May 1, 2016 that Malia was to attend Harvard. It is the middle of May and Sasha Obama has still not announced where she is going to college. Either she is hoping to get into her top choice by waitlist or the Obamas are scrambling for a Plan B.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Yeah right, I am sure Harvard would not admit those Obamalings unless they get good SAT scores. Harvard was never a creation of advertisement. It's a pure accident that their undergraduates failed to win a Nobel in, like, a century, and Kushner is on his way to fix that.
  40. @Change that Matters
    Our Barbarian Masters ensured us the Rise of China (RICe) would lead to Them becoming more like Us. Only idiots believed this, but since morons dominate our cultural and intellectual institutions the Lie became a Truth.

    Turns out We've been becoming more like Them all along.

    Though to be honest, I'd rather live under the Chinese Social Media Score Regime based on some semblance of homogeneous cultural/economic interest than ranked by our Savage Masters in Silicon Valley whose allegiances are anybody's guess.*

    On a side note: to ensure my children's place at a Top University, I've put them into a foster home run by a Southern Baptist, white, married, heterosexual couple who eat meat, drive pickup trucks, and whose family lines can be traced to slave-owning planters. I dare Harvard to find someone raised under greater adversity.

    * Self censoring to improve my JQ Credit Score.

    NO! Your kids foster parents are descendants of Southern Abolitionists. That will maximize their scores.

    • Replies: @Change that Matters
    You, sir, have a bright future in any college admissions consulting service. Southern Abolitionist is perfect.
  41. I predict (with only moderate confidence) that this new scoring system will be abandoned. One feature that does not seem sustainable is the proposal to report each student’s score to the university admissions office but not to the student. That flies against freedom of information principles and does not seem fair or sustainable. It is one thing to keep confidential reference letters and the like, but computing a quantitative score and refusing to let the individual know it seems untenable.

    Has the establishment reached peak HBD-blindness and HBD-induced stupidity yet? They want to remove racial differences in average performance without acknowledging that they exist and without using race as an instrument.

  42. @Johann Ricke

    Adversity score does not discriminate “enough” against Asians and in favor of blacks, because there are lots of 1st generation Asians that would have high adversity scores similar to Latinos – non-English speaking home, low income, low educational achievement for parents, etc.
     
    I'm trying to figure out how they avoid dinging black kids from backgrounds like Michelle Obama's, who haven't mastered basic grammar by the time they are about to graduate from Princeton.

    Have you ever listened to WHITE Gen-Zers talk, or read their posts?

  43. @prime noticer
    now, i didn't have time to go back and check every president of the college board over time, because they made it hard to figure this stuff out, so i only went back to the 70s, which is also fine, because that's when things started to change anyway. dates may be off by 1 year or so. without further discussion, here are the presidents of the college board, since 1972 or so:

    sidney marland 1972/73-1979. president of what was then called the college entrance examination board. a liberal who served under nixon, a vocal opponent of school segregation who seemed to like to threaten to send guys with rifles to force old school southerners to admit africans to their public schools. marland also served in the prototype version of what eventually became the US department of education.

    marland published a well known document in 1972 called the marland report, an open attack on intelligence, where he sought to redefine giftedness as a broad range of abilities, instead of just being about intelligence. his views would be in direct opposition to a man such as lewis terman.

    george hanford 1979-1986. the beginning of the change in earnest. hanford served at the college board for 30 years, and was probably some kind of suck up, like NFL commissioner goodell today.

    facing constant attacks that the SAT discriminated, hanford opened commissions starting in 1980 to study whether it was in fact biased against various groups. hanford did defend the SAT as fair, and as something which could identify high ability vibrant-americans based on their test performance alone, offering them a better future, versus a future where standardized testing was eliminated and those diamond in the rough kids would never get into a college. nevertheless, after years of working with people attacking the SAT, he probably deliberately hired -

    donald stewart 1986-1999. a mulatto who was president of spelman college from 1976-1986. he's the guy who did the most damage. basically a one man campaign against the SAT and standardized testing in general, exactly as you would expect. first he changed the name of the test. then the re-center of the test, to lower the ceiling.

    gaston caperton 1999-2012. a democrat from west virginia. the idiot who added the essay. a zero, nothing person. standard issue educrat. around this time is when the ACT began to supplant the SAT. for now obvious reasons.

    (david coleman) 2012-2019. i don't think we need to say anymore. first he ruined the test. eliminated a century's worth of work developing good SAT questions, replacing them with crap. now he will simply add bonus points for vibrant people, as jews have always wanted to do.

    over the decades, we observe the leftist position being taken to it's ultimate conclusion. a great thing created by european men passes thru several hands, moving steadily leftward, until eventually a jewish guy controls the entire enterprise, and he ruins it in total. almost everything works this way, and this could be said to be the social science version of gravity. all social things move from european man to jewish man in a linear fashion.

    Why didn’t you just quote the chorus from Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit”?

  44. Once again, the “Yale or Jail” stereotype is pushed. Why not encourage people to look at, and attend, their local state university? Way cheaper, and you might even get a degree that will make you a productive citizen!

  45. @Paul
    How long before Chinese and the Hollywood celebrities learn how to game the social credit score?

    I guess I got the terminology wrong. In the United States, it should not be called the “social credit score,” but rather the “adversity score.”

  46. By Anemona Hartocollis

    If I ask for this by name at the hospital reception desk, will they send me to the dermatologist or to the flower shop?

    Anemona Hartocollis =

    Loathsome non-racial.
    Hormonal escalation.

    In other earthshaking news, Europe’s tallest building is under construction in…

    Chechnya:

  47. @68W58
    I usually lurk here on iSteve, but this paragraph from your link caught my attention:

    “Perhaps the most remarkable act of the IRS was this: It assigned 6,411 ITINs to unauthorized aliens presumably using a single address in Morganton, North Carolina. According to the 2010 Census, there were only 16,681 people in Morganton. So, for the IRS to have been correct in issuing 6,411 ITINS to unauthorized aliens at a single address in Morganton it would have meant that 38 percent of the town’s total population were unauthorized alien workers using a single address.”

    I live in Morganton (in the county actually, but close enough) and there should be no way that 6400 tax returns could come through our little post office without someone noticing. Is there any way that the address was used for electronic returns without physical checks being sent via the mail? We have a large Guatemalan population here who first came to work in a chicken processing plant in the 90s, but not a lot of crime. There’s been nothing about this in the local media so far (our local paper is owned by Berkshire Hathaway).

    Yeah, I think your theory is pretty likely. It’s sort of what I was implying with my crack about the letter carrier. No USPS employee would tolerate anything of the kind! Most likely it all got loaded onto EBT cards, or their functional equivalent.

    PS: At first glance, I figured your moniker was an address in Manhattan. So much for unfounded assumptions!

  48. Anonymous[412] • Disclaimer says:

    Basically scholastic and academic institutional integrity has been politicized and prostituted.

  49. @Calvin Hobbes
    The Wall Street Journal also has an article about this:

    SAT to Give Students ‘Adversity Score’ to Capture Social and Economic Background
    New score comes as college admissions decisions are under scrutiny

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/sat-to-give-students-adversity-score-to-capture-social-and-economic-background-11557999000?mod=hp_lead_pos6

    Quote from WSJ article:

    “The purpose is to get to race without using race,” said Anthony Carnevale, director of Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce. Mr. Carnevale formerly worked for the College Board and oversaw the Strivers program.

    The purpose is to get to race without using race,

    In theory, you could do a regression analysis that might identify “diamonds in the rough” — i.e., individuals whose actual ability has been obscured by “adversity,” and who therefore overperform in college compared to their high school SATs and GPA.

    But they have been trying to do this forever and they can’t ever get the numbers to work out the way they want. Rather, if you honestly look for kids who are likely to overperform, any extra slots go to newly immigrated Asians (and a smattering of poor whites) because they are the only ones who are both poor and smart.

    Using “bad schools” could be a loophole, however, because such schools have low test scores precisely because they are nearly 100% black or hispanic. Thus, they could serve as ‘secret’ proxies for race itself.

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
    "In theory, you could do a regression analysis that might identify 'diamonds in the rough' — i.e., individuals whose actual ability has been obscured by 'adversity,' and who therefore overperform in college compared to their high school SATs and GPA."

    But wasn't the point (or one of the points) of the SAT to find diamonds in the rough, in the first place?

    As James Traube pointed out in City on a Hill, the Jewish City College strivers were more impoverished than the black and Hispanic AA admits of 50-60 years later, but the Jews' extreme poverty and need to work full-time jobs, did not keep them back.

    This mook/mope Carnevale confessed to his motive, and it's always the same story with these characters. They hate the merit principle, and will destroy it, by any means necessary, and have turned every institution into a racial/ethnic pork barrel.

  50. I was hoping the Adversity Score would be based on a questionnaire where candidates could lie through their teeth, but if it is based on publicly available data, I guess it will finally end that horrible scourge of the real estate market in the US, i.e. parents going way out of their way to get into a “good” school district. In fact, since the great leveler here is the adversity score, the winning move is to move into a bad school district but send your kids to a private school.

  51. @68W58
    I usually lurk here on iSteve, but this paragraph from your link caught my attention:

    “Perhaps the most remarkable act of the IRS was this: It assigned 6,411 ITINs to unauthorized aliens presumably using a single address in Morganton, North Carolina. According to the 2010 Census, there were only 16,681 people in Morganton. So, for the IRS to have been correct in issuing 6,411 ITINS to unauthorized aliens at a single address in Morganton it would have meant that 38 percent of the town’s total population were unauthorized alien workers using a single address.”

    I live in Morganton (in the county actually, but close enough) and there should be no way that 6400 tax returns could come through our little post office without someone noticing. Is there any way that the address was used for electronic returns without physical checks being sent via the mail? We have a large Guatemalan population here who first came to work in a chicken processing plant in the 90s, but not a lot of crime. There’s been nothing about this in the local media so far (our local paper is owned by Berkshire Hathaway).

    Is there any way that the address was used for electronic returns without physical checks being sent via the mail?

    Sure. The IRS can issue refunds by direct deposit. e-filing and online/wire transfers are commonplace now, and likely the norm. I daresay most people simply don’t bother anymore with paper returns, statements, notifications or cheques for any aspect of their financial lives. Certainly, no one under the age of 45 or so, opts for it from some sense of security, if they opt for it at all.

  52. • Replies: @J.Ross
    Way too long. The facial recognition cameras of the future will hurt you if you look like you're deliberately avoiding them.
  53. @Jack D

    He added, however, that while Yale was seeking race-neutral tools for admission, he did not think they were enough to replace the consideration of race in some cases.
     
    Adversity score does not discriminate "enough" against Asians and in favor of blacks, because there are lots of 1st generation Asians that would have high adversity scores similar to Latinos - non-English speaking home, low income, low educational achievement for parents, etc. BUT, it will do in a pinch if AA becomes illegal per the S. Ct. This is the next best thing, much "better" than just going by test scores, because so much of the adversity score is a proxy for race.

    Right. This just does the colleges’ racial discrimination work for them. Make it illegal for us to discriminate on the basis of race? We will just work with the SAT people and they will artificially inflate minorities’ test scores so their applications falsely indicate they are superior students we just have to have in our school. Less work for us, and no exposure to costly litigation.

    This seems to aim the litigation at the SAT people though. This is just a small step from outright admitting that they are going to score black students’ test results higher. And who provides the info that calculates the adversity score?

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    And who provides the info that calculates the adversity score?
     
    Exactly. Are they going to audit the parents' tax returns? Conduct personal interviews to assess parents' marital status and English proficiency?

    They could ask the kids to volunteer some of this information in a questionnaire but that would be very incomplete and unreliable. Besides, reminding kids of their "adversity" as they take a test will supposedly trigger "stereotype threat" that will cause their scores to plummet.

    Either this whole thing will never happen or it's all a smokescreen for rewarding the one thing they can get data on -- school performance.
  54. @AnonAnon

    It looks like Asians will get hammered slightly less by this measure than will whites.
     
    Shocker. It's just another tool to f*ck over whites being admitted to the most competitive colleges. If you live in California you're already living this reality with regards to the UCs (and they're starting to make inroads at Cal Poly) - if you're white, especially a white male, you need to be a superstar to get into the good UCs - I've heard more than a few stories about kids who didn't get into UCSB for engineering but are admitted to Purdue, a much higher ranked program. If you're a white Californian you might as well plan for the extra expense for your kid to go out of state. My first child took the ACTs because the SAT decided to change the test his junior year (and, at the time, it seemed less vulnerable to cramming/cheating but no longer, it seems) but now the rest of my kids will use the ACT exclusively - there is no reason not to, all colleges take both tests.

    UCSB isn’t a party school anymore?

  55. @Hypnotoad666

    The purpose is to get to race without using race,
     
    In theory, you could do a regression analysis that might identify "diamonds in the rough" -- i.e., individuals whose actual ability has been obscured by "adversity," and who therefore overperform in college compared to their high school SATs and GPA.

    But they have been trying to do this forever and they can't ever get the numbers to work out the way they want. Rather, if you honestly look for kids who are likely to overperform, any extra slots go to newly immigrated Asians (and a smattering of poor whites) because they are the only ones who are both poor and smart.

    Using "bad schools" could be a loophole, however, because such schools have low test scores precisely because they are nearly 100% black or hispanic. Thus, they could serve as 'secret' proxies for race itself.

    “In theory, you could do a regression analysis that might identify ‘diamonds in the rough’ — i.e., individuals whose actual ability has been obscured by ‘adversity,’ and who therefore overperform in college compared to their high school SATs and GPA.”

    But wasn’t the point (or one of the points) of the SAT to find diamonds in the rough, in the first place?

    As James Traube pointed out in City on a Hill, the Jewish City College strivers were more impoverished than the black and Hispanic AA admits of 50-60 years later, but the Jews’ extreme poverty and need to work full-time jobs, did not keep them back.

    This mook/mope Carnevale confessed to his motive, and it’s always the same story with these characters. They hate the merit principle, and will destroy it, by any means necessary, and have turned every institution into a racial/ethnic pork barrel.

  56. @Change that Matters
    Our Barbarian Masters ensured us the Rise of China (RICe) would lead to Them becoming more like Us. Only idiots believed this, but since morons dominate our cultural and intellectual institutions the Lie became a Truth.

    Turns out We've been becoming more like Them all along.

    Though to be honest, I'd rather live under the Chinese Social Media Score Regime based on some semblance of homogeneous cultural/economic interest than ranked by our Savage Masters in Silicon Valley whose allegiances are anybody's guess.*

    On a side note: to ensure my children's place at a Top University, I've put them into a foster home run by a Southern Baptist, white, married, heterosexual couple who eat meat, drive pickup trucks, and whose family lines can be traced to slave-owning planters. I dare Harvard to find someone raised under greater adversity.

    * Self censoring to improve my JQ Credit Score.

    That’s a very silly comment, seeing, form the chart, that the Asians score little on this new metric. It’s as if another way to screw the Chinese means, for you, a sign of Chinese privilege.

    You sound as if wouldn’t be able to go to college. The fact that you still read articles with charts should count for something. Good Striver!

  57. @Triumph104

    On the other hand, you’d be punishing black strivers who have sacrificed to get their kids into a less black school. What colleges desperately want are bourgeois blacks, and this system sounds like it won’t do them any good.
     

    I’m trying to figure out how they avoid dinging black kids from backgrounds like Michelle Obama’s, who haven’t mastered basic grammar by the time they are about to graduate from Princeton.
     
    Programs designed to get more black students into elite institutions unwittingly punish middle-class American native blacks. On one hand, these blacks aren't smart enough to compete on merit for slots against the children of African and Caribbean immigrants. And on the other hand, middle-class American native black families aren't screwed up enough to be helped by programs like the SAT's Diversity Score.

    Look at Michelle Obama's children. Despite being the daughter of the President of the United States and a double legacy, Malia Obama only got into Harvard because of the Z-Plan which requires below average admits take a gap year between high school and college. It was announced on May 1, 2016 that Malia was to attend Harvard. It is the middle of May and Sasha Obama has still not announced where she is going to college. Either she is hoping to get into her top choice by waitlist or the Obamas are scrambling for a Plan B.

    Yeah right, I am sure Harvard would not admit those Obamalings unless they get good SAT scores. Harvard was never a creation of advertisement. It’s a pure accident that their undergraduates failed to win a Nobel in, like, a century, and Kushner is on his way to fix that.

  58. Ali says:

    When I lived in Turkey some 20 years ago, the country gave advantages on its national exams to students who came from rural areas. So, more affluent urban students, whose families might have homes or relatives in the boonies, put down those addresses to gain the advantage. What’s to stop American students from doing the same if they get “points” for it?

  59. @Mr. Blank

    So instead of announcing that they have made reforms to eliminate outright fraud, like hiring an impostor to take the test Ted Kennedy-style, and have made the SAT less vulnerable to big time modern test prep, they’ve announced … what?
     
    This was exactly my reaction. When I first saw a link to this, I assumed it must have been to the Onion or another parody news site.

    You've just had a huge cheating scandal which involved wealthy, ambitious parents paying people to game the system for their kids...and you're creating an entirely new elaborate way to game the system?

    If the people in charge of the SAT are this naive, no wonder so much of our society has been taken over by bandits. Imagine a police force staffed by people who can't conceive of why anybody would want to break the law. They would be constantly thinking to themselves, "can't everybody see how nice society would be if we would all just obey the rules?"

    They would be constantly thinking to themselves, “can’t everybody see how nice society would be if we would all just obey the rules?”
    —————Except these same people are likely to be the ones who also say that it’s just fine to have illegal aliens who break laws.

  60. MLK says:

    This strikes me as potentially moving the ball in the right, rather than wrong, direction.

    As a matter of first impression, more data is better than less. More to the point, this isn’t really more data, college and university admissions departments know all about each of the kids applying, reading between the lines. As a general rule, I assume that those engaged over the long term in successful, competitive endeavors know what they’re doing. So the Adversity Score isn’t telling Admissions anything they don’t already know.

    It’s empowering admissions officers applying an ‘all else being equal . . . .’ By which I really mean, applicants within particular diversity categories (Race; Ethnicity; Sexual Orientation; National Origin . . .).

    The dirty little secret — conceit, really, is that college admissions staffs reinvent the wheel every year. Funny that the rough composition of each admitted class remains pretty much like it was the year before.

    My essential point is that anyone half intelligent knows that behind the curtain any particular applicant isn’t competing with all or even most others. Like is competing against like.

    I consider it no small accomplishment that the SAT Corporation is protecting the integrity of their test by offering a separate Adversity Score, as opposed to Race Norming.

    Schools are going to and should be sued for the representations they have been making to applicants about their chances of admission. The schools able to afford it will, mark my words, cease charging an application fee, lest they sued for fraud.

    Someone should do a study comparing the success or failure since WWII of competitive schools sorting properly. In other words, the smartest kids (by standardized test scores) admitted to the most competitive schools and the ones they want to attend.

    The current situation, as evidenced by the recent admissions scandal, is untenable. You cannot have the backbone of a successful, developed country — those who work hard, play by the rules, and otherwise reap the rewards of their efforts — unable to achieve the American dream when it comes to their child’s college education.

  61. In the Chicago public schools, where I raised my kids (and yes, they went to the local public school and a magnet public high school) they use a similar system for the magnet high schools (which are called ‘selective enrollment high schools.’) The system is called the Tier System and is described as follows:

    Every Chicago address falls within a specific census tract. We look at five socio-economic characteristics for each census tract: (1) median family income, (2) percentage of single-parent households, (3) percentage of households where English is not the first language, (4) percentage of homes occupied by the homeowner, and (5) level of adult education attainment. We also look at a sixth characteristic, the achievement scores from attendance area schools for the students who live in each census tract.

    Based on the results of each of these six areas, each census tract is given a specific score; these scores are ranked and divided into four groups – or ‘tiers’ – each consisting of approximately the same number of school-age children. This is how we establish the four tiers. Consequently, every Chicago address falls into one of the four tiers, based on the characteristics mentioned above.

    So this helps kids from poor neighborhoods (i.e. black and Hispanic kids) get into magnet schools, although these are the smarter kids from these neighborhoods, because they still have to do well on the selective enrollment test and get good grades. Not as well as the white kids, but not terrible. My daughters both went to Lane Tech, one of the bigger, more famous magnet schools on the north side of the City (not far from Wrigley Field) and got/are getting great educations there.

  62. @anon
    I have found a College Board presentation on the Environmental Context Dashboard Environmental Context Dashboard: A Scalable, Systematic Approach to
    Educational Disadvantage
    that has an important graph on page 42. The graph, entitled "Over (+) or Under ((--) Performance Relative to Predicted GPA* shows that low-adversity students have slightly higher college GPAs (by about 0.1) than what their grades and test scores would predict and the high-adversity students have slightly lower GPAs (by about 0.1) than what grades and test scores predict. So it cannot be honestly said that the adversity score corrects biases present in standardized test scores.

    anon [910], *Thanks* for the link to that 45-page slide deck from the College Board on their social credit score initiative (PDF). The page-42 graph that Steve put in the main post (“Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA”) is especially informative.

    That graph is meant to re-assure college admissions offices that use of the Adversity Score won’t lead to the enrollment of high-Adversity-Score-students who go on to perform poorly in class. It shows that the performance of students from the three most-adverse deciles (8, 9, and 10) earn college GPAs that are only slightly worse than would be predicted on the basis of academic criteria only (high sch00l GPA + AP class performance + SAT score). In numerical terms, the Overall (red) line shows that this cohort’s GPA is only 0.1 point lower than predicted.

    However, there are some caveats.

    * The Overall line is the wrong focus, as Adversity Score won’t affect admissions decisions at Less Selective Colleges (yellow line) and will barely budge Modestly Selective institutions (green). Highly Selective Colleges (blue) are what elites, NYT editors, and subscribers care about.

    * For Highly Selective Colleges, the three most adverse deciles’ college GPA under-performs by 0.18 points. In real life, the underperformance is worse, since these colleges mostly admit students from the left side of the graph. The authors of the deck could have made this clear, but chose not to. Students in the four least-adverse deciles (1, 2, 3, & 4) over-perform by about 0.07. So the relative underperformance of {8, 9, & 10} is about one-quarter of a GPA point. That’s three times what the graph purports to show (red line, “Higher adversity is associated with only very small increase in the risk of under-performing on GPA”).

    * Unsurprisingly, while the least-adverse decile (1) isn’t different from its neighbors, the students in the most-adverse bin (10) do much worse than academic measures alone would predict.

    * There’s an important apples-to-oranges elephant in this room. The paywalled WSJ article notes that 15 factors go into the Adversity Score. The College Board won’t name them, but Steve reproduced a figure from that article, naming four factors from each of three “Environments”: High School, Neighborhood, and Family. The “Family” elements are: Median income, Single Parent, Education level [of parent(s)], and ESL.

    The College Board slide deck on the “Environmental Context Dashboard” explicitly states that the Adversity Score being discussed is based on “Neighborhood and High School Adversity Measures” (slide 10). Slide 11: “A student is tagged with the adversity measures for their high school and neighborhood, which are averaged to create a nationally normed measure between 0 and 100.” Slide 12 shows a hypothetical student’s “Neighborhood Context Ratings” and “High School Context Ratings.” No “Family Context” panel. There is no Family Context component to the “Adversity Score” that’s outlined in this College Board deck. It’s different from the “Adversity Score” discussed by the WSJ and NYT.

    Bait and switch?

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    Bait and switch?
     
    I'd say "Yes."

    The go-to work around for liberal policymakers trying to reverse-engineer a pro-minority "race neutral" system is to give bonus points for being the "best of the worst" at low-performing, non-white high schools. IIRC California and Texas both have programs like this.

    The information about family income, marital status, and language proficiency could never be reliably collected in practice. So I imagine it is all just a smokescreen in preparation for using the low test scores of the kids' high school as a de facto proxy for race.
    , @Jack D
    "Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA” is highly misleading - they are saying that the underperformance will be small ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL. In other words, if you compare a kid with a 700, 3.5 and 4 on his APs from the ghetto he will only do slightly worse than the rich white kid from the suburbs with the same scores (probably because ghetto HS grading is easier). In other words, it a rational world, we would give a slight BONUS to the "privileged" kid (all else being equal) because he's going to do better.


    BUT that's not what the colleges are going to do with it - quite the opposite. They are going to add your adversity score (or 2 or 3x times it ) to your SAT score to get your Adversity SAT Score (ASS). Maybe Haven's SAT of 1400 is more than Shanikra's 1200, but Shanikra's ASS is bigger. The whole point of having an exact numerical quantification of your privilege (or lack thereof) is to give the college a tool to precisely reflect it in admission decisions.

  63. Credit where it’s due: who’d have thought that the College Board could get people to falsely claim an address in a bad neighborhood for the sake of academic advantage?

    More seriously though, this score is appallingly easy to game. In order of difficulty:

    1. Fictitious address in a maximally “adverse” neighborhood environment.

    2. Enroll in a safe-but-mediocre high school for a month or so.

    3. Plausible story that the student lives with non-English speaking grandmother.

    Hispanics and Asians will probably have less trouble with the last one, though colleges will still find a way to conclude that Asian adversity doesn’t count.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The ink isn't even dry on this and people are already scheming to game the system. We've seen that parents will pay hundreds of thousands of $ to get a leg up for their kids. You should be able to game the Adversity Score for a lot less than that.
  64. Among the elderly, couples will sometimes get a divorce to game the benefits system. Will ‘tiger parents’ do the same to help their kids get into college?

  65. Anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    As ever, the British Labour Party are the real pioneers in this field.

    Back in the 1960s and 70s they more or less abolished selective state education in the UK by destroying the ‘Grammar schools’ -many of which were of great and ancient provenance, replacing them with ‘all-in’ entry Comprehensive schools. True to form, Labour Party social engineering placed the very worst students in what were top grammar schools, in the name of ‘class privilege’.

    The results were predictable.

  66. What colleges desperately want are bourgeois blacks

    Colleges aren’t people. The people who fund them want what they’ve wanted since time immemorial – to cut down on the competition. In this case, to destroy the white (and to a lesser extent Asian) bourgeoisie.

    The adversity score couldn’t be more effective at that were it designed expressly for that purpose. The more likely your family is to produce competition, the more likely you’ll be disqualified from the competition.

  67. All of this smoke and mirrors is in the service of one objective: to conceal the rollback of what remains of actual meritocracy.

  68. @william munny
    Right. This just does the colleges' racial discrimination work for them. Make it illegal for us to discriminate on the basis of race? We will just work with the SAT people and they will artificially inflate minorities' test scores so their applications falsely indicate they are superior students we just have to have in our school. Less work for us, and no exposure to costly litigation.

    This seems to aim the litigation at the SAT people though. This is just a small step from outright admitting that they are going to score black students' test results higher. And who provides the info that calculates the adversity score?

    And who provides the info that calculates the adversity score?

    Exactly. Are they going to audit the parents’ tax returns? Conduct personal interviews to assess parents’ marital status and English proficiency?

    They could ask the kids to volunteer some of this information in a questionnaire but that would be very incomplete and unreliable. Besides, reminding kids of their “adversity” as they take a test will supposedly trigger “stereotype threat” that will cause their scores to plummet.

    Either this whole thing will never happen or it’s all a smokescreen for rewarding the one thing they can get data on — school performance.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    A little editing could add a lot of value to articles covering this topic, by reminding readers that people respond to incentives.

    E.g. "Students whose parents submit CSS Profile forms claiming that they are living in poverty stand to gain from the Adversity Score. Applicants who plausibly assert that they live in disadvantaged neighborhoods will also gain a leg up on competitors from stable neighborhoods. The best students at bad schools in poor neighborhoods will have an easier time securing a coveted spot at a selective college, compared to students performing at the same level in better high schools, providing new opportunities for private-sector coaches to sell high-priced advice to increasingly anxious upper-class parents."

  69. @ic1000
    anon [910], *Thanks* for the link to that 45-page slide deck from the College Board on their social credit score initiative (PDF). The page-42 graph that Steve put in the main post ("Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA") is especially informative.

    That graph is meant to re-assure college admissions offices that use of the Adversity Score won't lead to the enrollment of high-Adversity-Score-students who go on to perform poorly in class. It shows that the performance of students from the three most-adverse deciles (8, 9, and 10) earn college GPAs that are only slightly worse than would be predicted on the basis of academic criteria only (high sch00l GPA + AP class performance + SAT score). In numerical terms, the Overall (red) line shows that this cohort's GPA is only 0.1 point lower than predicted.

    However, there are some caveats.

    * The Overall line is the wrong focus, as Adversity Score won't affect admissions decisions at Less Selective Colleges (yellow line) and will barely budge Modestly Selective institutions (green). Highly Selective Colleges (blue) are what elites, NYT editors, and subscribers care about.

    * For Highly Selective Colleges, the three most adverse deciles' college GPA under-performs by 0.18 points. In real life, the underperformance is worse, since these colleges mostly admit students from the left side of the graph. The authors of the deck could have made this clear, but chose not to. Students in the four least-adverse deciles (1, 2, 3, & 4) over-perform by about 0.07. So the relative underperformance of {8, 9, & 10} is about one-quarter of a GPA point. That's three times what the graph purports to show (red line, "Higher adversity is associated with only very small increase in the risk of under-performing on GPA").

    * Unsurprisingly, while the least-adverse decile (1) isn't different from its neighbors, the students in the most-adverse bin (10) do much worse than academic measures alone would predict.

    * There's an important apples-to-oranges elephant in this room. The paywalled WSJ article notes that 15 factors go into the Adversity Score. The College Board won't name them, but Steve reproduced a figure from that article, naming four factors from each of three "Environments": High School, Neighborhood, and Family. The "Family" elements are: Median income, Single Parent, Education level [of parent(s)], and ESL.

    The College Board slide deck on the "Environmental Context Dashboard" explicitly states that the Adversity Score being discussed is based on "Neighborhood and High School Adversity Measures" (slide 10). Slide 11: "A student is tagged with the adversity measures for their high school and neighborhood, which are averaged to create a nationally normed measure between 0 and 100." Slide 12 shows a hypothetical student's "Neighborhood Context Ratings" and "High School Context Ratings." No "Family Context" panel. There is no Family Context component to the "Adversity Score" that's outlined in this College Board deck. It's different from the "Adversity Score" discussed by the WSJ and NYT.

    Bait and switch?

    Bait and switch?

    I’d say “Yes.”

    The go-to work around for liberal policymakers trying to reverse-engineer a pro-minority “race neutral” system is to give bonus points for being the “best of the worst” at low-performing, non-white high schools. IIRC California and Texas both have programs like this.

    The information about family income, marital status, and language proficiency could never be reliably collected in practice. So I imagine it is all just a smokescreen in preparation for using the low test scores of the kids’ high school as a de facto proxy for race.

  70. @Hypnotoad666

    And who provides the info that calculates the adversity score?
     
    Exactly. Are they going to audit the parents' tax returns? Conduct personal interviews to assess parents' marital status and English proficiency?

    They could ask the kids to volunteer some of this information in a questionnaire but that would be very incomplete and unreliable. Besides, reminding kids of their "adversity" as they take a test will supposedly trigger "stereotype threat" that will cause their scores to plummet.

    Either this whole thing will never happen or it's all a smokescreen for rewarding the one thing they can get data on -- school performance.

    A little editing could add a lot of value to articles covering this topic, by reminding readers that people respond to incentives.

    E.g. “Students whose parents submit CSS Profile forms claiming that they are living in poverty stand to gain from the Adversity Score. Applicants who plausibly assert that they live in disadvantaged neighborhoods will also gain a leg up on competitors from stable neighborhoods. The best students at bad schools in poor neighborhoods will have an easier time securing a coveted spot at a selective college, compared to students performing at the same level in better high schools, providing new opportunities for private-sector coaches to sell high-priced advice to increasingly anxious upper-class parents.”

    • Replies: @ic1000
    Here is an improved version of the final two paragraphs of the WSJ article Steve linked.

    At Florida State University, the adversity scores helped the school boost nonwhite enrollment to 42% from 37% in the incoming freshman class, said John Barnhill, assistant vice president for academic affairs. He said he expects pushback from some parents and guidance counselors.

    "If I am going to make room for more of the [poor and minority] students we want to admit and I have a finite number of spaces, then someone has to suffer and that will be privileged kids on the bubble Trump-voting two-parent working class whites from flyover country," he said.
     

  71. We had to brain drain the village in order to save it.

  72. @Chris Renner
    Credit where it's due: who'd have thought that the College Board could get people to falsely claim an address in a bad neighborhood for the sake of academic advantage?

    More seriously though, this score is appallingly easy to game. In order of difficulty:

    1. Fictitious address in a maximally "adverse" neighborhood environment.

    2. Enroll in a safe-but-mediocre high school for a month or so.

    3. Plausible story that the student lives with non-English speaking grandmother.

    Hispanics and Asians will probably have less trouble with the last one, though colleges will still find a way to conclude that Asian adversity doesn't count.

    The ink isn’t even dry on this and people are already scheming to game the system. We’ve seen that parents will pay hundreds of thousands of $ to get a leg up for their kids. You should be able to game the Adversity Score for a lot less than that.

  73. @ic1000
    A little editing could add a lot of value to articles covering this topic, by reminding readers that people respond to incentives.

    E.g. "Students whose parents submit CSS Profile forms claiming that they are living in poverty stand to gain from the Adversity Score. Applicants who plausibly assert that they live in disadvantaged neighborhoods will also gain a leg up on competitors from stable neighborhoods. The best students at bad schools in poor neighborhoods will have an easier time securing a coveted spot at a selective college, compared to students performing at the same level in better high schools, providing new opportunities for private-sector coaches to sell high-priced advice to increasingly anxious upper-class parents."

    Here is an improved version of the final two paragraphs of the WSJ article Steve linked.

    At Florida State University, the adversity scores helped the school boost nonwhite enrollment to 42% from 37% in the incoming freshman class, said John Barnhill, assistant vice president for academic affairs. He said he expects pushback from some parents and guidance counselors.

    “If I am going to make room for more of the [poor and minority] students we want to admit and I have a finite number of spaces, then someone has to suffer and that will be privileged kids on the bubble Trump-voting two-parent working class whites from flyover country,” he said.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    It's really shocking how explicit they are about this now. In the past they used to play coy games where they would lie and say that AA wasn't HURTING anyone, it was just giving a little leg up to the less fortunate. Now the gloves are off - "We admit that this is a zero sum game and in order for more blacks to get a seat on the bus, some whiteys are going to have to walk."

    I have the feeling that this is a trial balloon by the College Board and the universities - they are waiting to see how much backlash there will be, if any. The comments in the NY Times (usually quite liberal) are not favorable - being a white liberal is one thing but messing with your kid's college chances is another. In the meantime, the Trump DoE needs to get involved and tell the universities that any college that tries to use this index is going to get their ass sued and their funding cut off because it is racially discriminatory against whites. Even though it is facially neutral it has "disparate impact". What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
  74. @ic1000
    anon [910], *Thanks* for the link to that 45-page slide deck from the College Board on their social credit score initiative (PDF). The page-42 graph that Steve put in the main post ("Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA") is especially informative.

    That graph is meant to re-assure college admissions offices that use of the Adversity Score won't lead to the enrollment of high-Adversity-Score-students who go on to perform poorly in class. It shows that the performance of students from the three most-adverse deciles (8, 9, and 10) earn college GPAs that are only slightly worse than would be predicted on the basis of academic criteria only (high sch00l GPA + AP class performance + SAT score). In numerical terms, the Overall (red) line shows that this cohort's GPA is only 0.1 point lower than predicted.

    However, there are some caveats.

    * The Overall line is the wrong focus, as Adversity Score won't affect admissions decisions at Less Selective Colleges (yellow line) and will barely budge Modestly Selective institutions (green). Highly Selective Colleges (blue) are what elites, NYT editors, and subscribers care about.

    * For Highly Selective Colleges, the three most adverse deciles' college GPA under-performs by 0.18 points. In real life, the underperformance is worse, since these colleges mostly admit students from the left side of the graph. The authors of the deck could have made this clear, but chose not to. Students in the four least-adverse deciles (1, 2, 3, & 4) over-perform by about 0.07. So the relative underperformance of {8, 9, & 10} is about one-quarter of a GPA point. That's three times what the graph purports to show (red line, "Higher adversity is associated with only very small increase in the risk of under-performing on GPA").

    * Unsurprisingly, while the least-adverse decile (1) isn't different from its neighbors, the students in the most-adverse bin (10) do much worse than academic measures alone would predict.

    * There's an important apples-to-oranges elephant in this room. The paywalled WSJ article notes that 15 factors go into the Adversity Score. The College Board won't name them, but Steve reproduced a figure from that article, naming four factors from each of three "Environments": High School, Neighborhood, and Family. The "Family" elements are: Median income, Single Parent, Education level [of parent(s)], and ESL.

    The College Board slide deck on the "Environmental Context Dashboard" explicitly states that the Adversity Score being discussed is based on "Neighborhood and High School Adversity Measures" (slide 10). Slide 11: "A student is tagged with the adversity measures for their high school and neighborhood, which are averaged to create a nationally normed measure between 0 and 100." Slide 12 shows a hypothetical student's "Neighborhood Context Ratings" and "High School Context Ratings." No "Family Context" panel. There is no Family Context component to the "Adversity Score" that's outlined in this College Board deck. It's different from the "Adversity Score" discussed by the WSJ and NYT.

    Bait and switch?

    “Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA” is highly misleading – they are saying that the underperformance will be small ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL. In other words, if you compare a kid with a 700, 3.5 and 4 on his APs from the ghetto he will only do slightly worse than the rich white kid from the suburbs with the same scores (probably because ghetto HS grading is easier). In other words, it a rational world, we would give a slight BONUS to the “privileged” kid (all else being equal) because he’s going to do better.

    BUT that’s not what the colleges are going to do with it – quite the opposite. They are going to add your adversity score (or 2 or 3x times it ) to your SAT score to get your Adversity SAT Score (ASS). Maybe Haven’s SAT of 1400 is more than Shanikra’s 1200, but Shanikra’s ASS is bigger. The whole point of having an exact numerical quantification of your privilege (or lack thereof) is to give the college a tool to precisely reflect it in admission decisions.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    > they are saying that the underperformance will be small ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL.

    My interpretation is that they've run a Principal Components Analysis, with collegiate GPA as the dependent variable. PC1, PC2, and PC3 are SAT score, High School GPA, and a composite measure of AP class performance (e.g. score and # classes taken). Maybe I even have the order of the PCs right.

    That graph shows that Adversity Score would be a useful addition to the model as PC4: reduce the residuals by acknowledging that higher Adversity Score leads to college performance that is about two tenths of a GPA point lower than otherwise predicted.

    What they're saying is, "By incorporating Adversity Score in the opposite sense from what a standard analysis would demand, the predictive power of our model is modestly diminished. And, if you follow our advice and read the graph wrong, the degradation of the model seems to be even less than it actually is."

  75. @ic1000
    Here is an improved version of the final two paragraphs of the WSJ article Steve linked.

    At Florida State University, the adversity scores helped the school boost nonwhite enrollment to 42% from 37% in the incoming freshman class, said John Barnhill, assistant vice president for academic affairs. He said he expects pushback from some parents and guidance counselors.

    "If I am going to make room for more of the [poor and minority] students we want to admit and I have a finite number of spaces, then someone has to suffer and that will be privileged kids on the bubble Trump-voting two-parent working class whites from flyover country," he said.
     

    It’s really shocking how explicit they are about this now. In the past they used to play coy games where they would lie and say that AA wasn’t HURTING anyone, it was just giving a little leg up to the less fortunate. Now the gloves are off – “We admit that this is a zero sum game and in order for more blacks to get a seat on the bus, some whiteys are going to have to walk.”

    I have the feeling that this is a trial balloon by the College Board and the universities – they are waiting to see how much backlash there will be, if any. The comments in the NY Times (usually quite liberal) are not favorable – being a white liberal is one thing but messing with your kid’s college chances is another. In the meantime, the Trump DoE needs to get involved and tell the universities that any college that tries to use this index is going to get their ass sued and their funding cut off because it is racially discriminatory against whites. Even though it is facially neutral it has “disparate impact”. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

    • Agree: ic1000
  76. @Jack D
    "Over or Under Performance Relative to Predicted GPA” is highly misleading - they are saying that the underperformance will be small ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL. In other words, if you compare a kid with a 700, 3.5 and 4 on his APs from the ghetto he will only do slightly worse than the rich white kid from the suburbs with the same scores (probably because ghetto HS grading is easier). In other words, it a rational world, we would give a slight BONUS to the "privileged" kid (all else being equal) because he's going to do better.


    BUT that's not what the colleges are going to do with it - quite the opposite. They are going to add your adversity score (or 2 or 3x times it ) to your SAT score to get your Adversity SAT Score (ASS). Maybe Haven's SAT of 1400 is more than Shanikra's 1200, but Shanikra's ASS is bigger. The whole point of having an exact numerical quantification of your privilege (or lack thereof) is to give the college a tool to precisely reflect it in admission decisions.

    > they are saying that the underperformance will be small ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL.

    My interpretation is that they’ve run a Principal Components Analysis, with collegiate GPA as the dependent variable. PC1, PC2, and PC3 are SAT score, High School GPA, and a composite measure of AP class performance (e.g. score and # classes taken). Maybe I even have the order of the PCs right.

    That graph shows that Adversity Score would be a useful addition to the model as PC4: reduce the residuals by acknowledging that higher Adversity Score leads to college performance that is about two tenths of a GPA point lower than otherwise predicted.

    What they’re saying is, “By incorporating Adversity Score in the opposite sense from what a standard analysis would demand, the predictive power of our model is modestly diminished. And, if you follow our advice and read the graph wrong, the degradation of the model seems to be even less than it actually is.”

    • Replies: @Jack D
    My point remains. In real life, they are not going use this graph to say," we're going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score but otherwise identical credentials, in preference to Applicant W because this graph shows us that we're only going to take a small hit in GPA by letting B in. " They are going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score BUT MUCH LOWER CREDENTIALS than W.

    Between 750 and 800, 60 percent of scorers are Asian and 33 percent are white, compared to 5 percent Latino and 2 percent black, but places like Harvard are taking 15% blacks, so they are letting in blacks with SAT scores 200 or 300 points below those required for whites and Asians. I'd like to see what the predicted college GPA hit is when you let in someone whose SATs are 200 points lower AND they have a high adversity score.

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/
  77. @ic1000
    > they are saying that the underperformance will be small ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL.

    My interpretation is that they've run a Principal Components Analysis, with collegiate GPA as the dependent variable. PC1, PC2, and PC3 are SAT score, High School GPA, and a composite measure of AP class performance (e.g. score and # classes taken). Maybe I even have the order of the PCs right.

    That graph shows that Adversity Score would be a useful addition to the model as PC4: reduce the residuals by acknowledging that higher Adversity Score leads to college performance that is about two tenths of a GPA point lower than otherwise predicted.

    What they're saying is, "By incorporating Adversity Score in the opposite sense from what a standard analysis would demand, the predictive power of our model is modestly diminished. And, if you follow our advice and read the graph wrong, the degradation of the model seems to be even less than it actually is."

    My point remains. In real life, they are not going use this graph to say,” we’re going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score but otherwise identical credentials, in preference to Applicant W because this graph shows us that we’re only going to take a small hit in GPA by letting B in. ” They are going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score BUT MUCH LOWER CREDENTIALS than W.

    Between 750 and 800, 60 percent of scorers are Asian and 33 percent are white, compared to 5 percent Latino and 2 percent black, but places like Harvard are taking 15% blacks, so they are letting in blacks with SAT scores 200 or 300 points below those required for whites and Asians. I’d like to see what the predicted college GPA hit is when you let in someone whose SATs are 200 points lower AND they have a high adversity score.

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    In which case it is only doubling down on the existing problem of "diversity hires." The alternative to acceleration, collapse, and civil war is to reject stuff like this. We won't so that's where we're headed.
    , @ic1000
    > They are going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score BUT MUCH LOWER CREDENTIALS than W.

    Your point is driven home by the College Board graph "SAT score distributions by race" that I posted above. For selective colleges, the Applicant B pool with equivalent credentials to W (to say nothing of A) is very, very shallow.

    You can only admit candidates who (a) exist and (b) apply. Even then, s/he can only go to one college.
  78. @AnonAnon

    How soon until Chinese parents ... underreport their income
     
    Please, they already do. A lot of them are in cash-heavy businesses. Take a look at the income data for the UCs and compare it to Cal Poly, the whitest public college in California.

    I toured Cal Poly Pomona recently, a commuter college where white kids are less than twenty percent of students. There was a Maclaren driving behind us on campus, and reading the CPP reddit later that day, it turns out it belonged to some rich Chinese kid whose parents parked him in the US for his California-resident bargain-tuition college education. The parking lots were full of fairly nice cars for a minority-dominated commuter school - Mercedes, Lexuses, etc., nicer on the whole than what I've seen in the Cal Poly San Luis Obispo student lots, supposedly the "richest" California public college.

    This. How are these geniuses supposed to defeat the white patriarchal conspiracy when they can’t figure out immigrant welfare scamming and tax under-reporting?
    Oh, right, because white people are voluntarily helping them every step of the way.

  79. @Jack D
    My point remains. In real life, they are not going use this graph to say," we're going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score but otherwise identical credentials, in preference to Applicant W because this graph shows us that we're only going to take a small hit in GPA by letting B in. " They are going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score BUT MUCH LOWER CREDENTIALS than W.

    Between 750 and 800, 60 percent of scorers are Asian and 33 percent are white, compared to 5 percent Latino and 2 percent black, but places like Harvard are taking 15% blacks, so they are letting in blacks with SAT scores 200 or 300 points below those required for whites and Asians. I'd like to see what the predicted college GPA hit is when you let in someone whose SATs are 200 points lower AND they have a high adversity score.

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/

    In which case it is only doubling down on the existing problem of “diversity hires.” The alternative to acceleration, collapse, and civil war is to reject stuff like this. We won’t so that’s where we’re headed.

  80. beau says:

    just when it seems this ‘nation’ (loose term, that is) cannot sink any lower, it is amply revealed that there is absolutely no level too low for those deluded ‘leaders’ (another loose term), so ubiquitous on this ‘land mass with competing interests’ (more apt than calling this clusterf**k a nation), to defy such a thought and go even deeper into insanity.

    this will all end and it will not end well.

  81. @Ibound1
    How soon until Chinese parents divorce, rent in crime ridden neighborhoods, underreport their income, attend the worst public school possible, get on food stamps - so their kids get into Harvard?

    Next year is my guess.

    Those Asian kids will also have to have by then juvenile criminal records and an illegitimate kid or two to overcome Harvard’s iron “Asian quota” limits. Somebody better alert the Triads.

  82. The higher the adversity score the more likely that you are guaranteed Pel Grants and Student Loans from uncle sugar to pay that $150k tuition every quarter. The Schools don’t care if you succeed or if you graduate they want that free money from the Fed printing press.

  83. @Jack D
    My point remains. In real life, they are not going use this graph to say," we're going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score but otherwise identical credentials, in preference to Applicant W because this graph shows us that we're only going to take a small hit in GPA by letting B in. " They are going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score BUT MUCH LOWER CREDENTIALS than W.

    Between 750 and 800, 60 percent of scorers are Asian and 33 percent are white, compared to 5 percent Latino and 2 percent black, but places like Harvard are taking 15% blacks, so they are letting in blacks with SAT scores 200 or 300 points below those required for whites and Asians. I'd like to see what the predicted college GPA hit is when you let in someone whose SATs are 200 points lower AND they have a high adversity score.

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/

    > They are going to admit Applicant B, with a high adversity score BUT MUCH LOWER CREDENTIALS than W.

    Your point is driven home by the College Board graph “SAT score distributions by race” that I posted above. For selective colleges, the Applicant B pool with equivalent credentials to W (to say nothing of A) is very, very shallow.

    You can only admit candidates who (a) exist and (b) apply. Even then, s/he can only go to one college.

  84. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:

    Just strengthening further the near-universal practice of race-based admissions that is supposedly illegal in this country. Predictable.

  85. All the more reason for parents NOT to send their children to college!

  86. @Andy
    So this, like all similar programs, is basically choosing the bad and incompetent in favor of the good and competent. At what point this starts hurting US competitiveness against it rivals, like the Chinese, who has a 2,000 year old tradition of picking the best people for its jobs? Is it by chance that the US is already losing the tech competitiveness in favor of China in some areas? (see the rise of Huawei, for instance)

    At what point this starts hurting US competitiveness against it rivals

    Sometime in the early 70s, by my estimation. About the time that real wages flatlined.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    As a data point, my daughter is in a grad school program now and she says that the foreign students have better math backgrounds than she does, despite having been a STEM major at a top American U. She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they've had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes. I asked her what she thought they had been doing in her classes instead of teaching her the math that the foreign students were taught? She said group projects, lots and lots of group projects. It's true that she had some very interesting undergrad group projects where they built a lot of cool things and got a lot of hands on experience.

    But, in a group project the minorities can latch on and get the same grade as the most competent people who wind up actually doing most of the work. You assign the minorities the least rigorous tasks where they can't fuck it up too much for the others. This is also good preparation for later life when the same thing happens at work. In America.

  87. This may end up leveling out the reputation of a lot of colleges. The mediocrity will get spread around and a lot of top students will wind up at the local state U that otherwise couldn’t have convinced them to attend.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    That’s already been happening for quite awhile, with the winners being those students themselves, their schools, and their communities. The losers are the discriminating elite (sic) schools, the mismatched, and the narrow-minded who recruit there, such as the national media, with predictable results.
  88. Why any sane individual would want to attend these bastions of statism, I cannot fathom. I’m glad 1 of my 2 opted out. And the 1st one is salty it didn’t pan out as expected, win-win!

  89. I wonder if the recent college admission scandal was used as sort of a “crisis actors” incident to further along this narrative. And why now? My thoughts were that having a handful of wealthy parents buying their children’s way into Harvard was somewhat limited and that the bigger scandal is how whites and Asians are discriminated against is the real elephant in the room. What a better way to defuse the situation and hit two birds with one stone.

  90. In the late 1970s I was posted to Headquarters Air Force ROTC in the College Scholarship Branch. When reviewing applications for 2 and 3-year scholarships, we filled out a form that resulted in a Quality Index Score, which helped the selection board make its decisions. Because an electrical engineering major had a tougher curriculum than an art history major, we multiplied the grade point average (GPA) of the engineering student (say, a 2.0 on a 4.0) by a higher factor than the art history student, offsetting the lower GPA. We did the same thing with colleges and universities; if the applicant was attending Cal Poly, the factor used was higher than for, say, Alcorn State. But it soon became clear that applicants from certain colleges (e.g., Alabama State) and certain majors (back then, usually education, art, etc.) were consistently losing out to what we called category 2 applicants (math, engineering, other hard sciences) at schools like MIT, RPI, etc. So of course we were directed to remove any factor that would give advantage to students dong reasonably well in difficult majors at tough schools.

    The more things change, the more they remain the same.

  91. @ex-banker
    Assuming this will be good for property values in gentrifying neighborhoods. Why not buy the cheap run-down house in the bad area when it helps the college application? At least the people stuck in white working class neighborhoods will start to earn their own Pokémon points when enough minorities end up there after getting squeezed out. Until the rules move against them.

    I live in an affluent town with a high ranking public high school. A fair portion of the few renters here are people who move into the area so their kids can attend high school and then move somewhere else once they have graduated. This also includes parents who send their kids to private schools for primary education but wanted to round them out and get normal socialization with regular (white) kids.

    You could see another type of gentrification where parents move specifically to area that has a high enough adversary scores to where getting in a top college would be a shoe in. Right now gentrification comes largely from childless hipsters and gays who don’t have a stake in the schools but that could change.

  92. @Desiderius

    At what point this starts hurting US competitiveness against it rivals
     
    Sometime in the early 70s, by my estimation. About the time that real wages flatlined.

    As a data point, my daughter is in a grad school program now and she says that the foreign students have better math backgrounds than she does, despite having been a STEM major at a top American U. She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they’ve had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes. I asked her what she thought they had been doing in her classes instead of teaching her the math that the foreign students were taught? She said group projects, lots and lots of group projects. It’s true that she had some very interesting undergrad group projects where they built a lot of cool things and got a lot of hands on experience.

    But, in a group project the minorities can latch on and get the same grade as the most competent people who wind up actually doing most of the work. You assign the minorities the least rigorous tasks where they can’t fuck it up too much for the others. This is also good preparation for later life when the same thing happens at work. In America.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they’ve had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes.
     
    Maybe they're just soulless grinds with no lives. Whereas Steve Jobs and Bill Gates partied it up all day and all night and yet managed build megacorps in their spare time. If your life isn't like a trailer from American Pie (the movie) rerun in a loop, maybe you're doing it wrong.
    , @J.Ross
    Group projects are a travesty and an abdication of all educational responsibility. The transfer intellectual wealth to the undeserving, they exist to let teachers not fail people. After a while, when it was an option, I would take a lower grade to not have to do projects with groups (I still did the work and the rest of my grades would be fine), which is obviously not good advice but only mentioned to underscore the purity of my hatred for group projects. I can't imagine a group project that would serve a student better than making fundamentals solid.
    In the workforce the desire will be for people with solid fundamentals, not a novel speculation on how a business enterprise would probably go. Imagine an army that replaced basic training and drill with a research-informed roundtable discussion on what combat is probably like. Now imagine that army fighting an army that did real education.
  93. @Fred C Dobbs
    UCSB was about +/- 85% White when I was there late 70s early 80s. It was considered (and still is) a relatively safe place to send your suburban whelps.

    Last I checked I think White percentage was in the high 30s.

    I wonder if there's another decent sized school in the country that has seen such a yuuuuge demographic shift in 40 years?

    In once sense, this is why our parents built the UC system in California. In the 60’s and 70’s, higher education was a birthright. Some children excelled and went to the top schools while others got in somewhere after either a mediocre high school education or took a few years off before going to college. Nowadays, it is clear that it is part of a racial spoils system, many of whom had nothing to do in any way with its founding.

    This is one of the big reasons new schools are not being built in California in spite of the fact that the population is surging. One of the appeals of a national university system is that the best and brightest go on to become the scientists, doctors, and managers who later run society so all people benefit even if they could not get into one of the limited slots. But the way it is now, people pay for colleges their kids will never qualify for on racial grounds and the end product are politically correct idiots who you hope you don’t run in to when they have graduated.

  94. @Jack D
    As a data point, my daughter is in a grad school program now and she says that the foreign students have better math backgrounds than she does, despite having been a STEM major at a top American U. She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they've had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes. I asked her what she thought they had been doing in her classes instead of teaching her the math that the foreign students were taught? She said group projects, lots and lots of group projects. It's true that she had some very interesting undergrad group projects where they built a lot of cool things and got a lot of hands on experience.

    But, in a group project the minorities can latch on and get the same grade as the most competent people who wind up actually doing most of the work. You assign the minorities the least rigorous tasks where they can't fuck it up too much for the others. This is also good preparation for later life when the same thing happens at work. In America.

    She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they’ve had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes.

    Maybe they’re just soulless grinds with no lives. Whereas Steve Jobs and Bill Gates partied it up all day and all night and yet managed build megacorps in their spare time. If your life isn’t like a trailer from American Pie (the movie) rerun in a loop, maybe you’re doing it wrong.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    If these people were professionally concerned with law or culture or our civil society, and they uttered the insipid engineer's dictum that "the humanities are easy because they are subjective," you could mock their work ethic. The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math. It's like an athletic skill. My life would be materially better in every respect had I been enslaved and forced to study math like a Han, and among plans for my life until the civil war kicks off is the notion to study the math I weaseled out of studying earlier, not as a moral thing but because I need it after all.
    , @Desiderius
    The truth is somewhere in the middle workload-wise but there's no excuse for the lack of rigour and quantity of utter bullshit stateside.
  95. @Dtbb
    Environmental Context Dashboard? What the hell does that mean? Hockey up north? Hot lunch down south?

    Sounds like what you hit with your face when AOC’s clown car smashes into the wall of reality.

  96. @Jack D
    As a data point, my daughter is in a grad school program now and she says that the foreign students have better math backgrounds than she does, despite having been a STEM major at a top American U. She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they've had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes. I asked her what she thought they had been doing in her classes instead of teaching her the math that the foreign students were taught? She said group projects, lots and lots of group projects. It's true that she had some very interesting undergrad group projects where they built a lot of cool things and got a lot of hands on experience.

    But, in a group project the minorities can latch on and get the same grade as the most competent people who wind up actually doing most of the work. You assign the minorities the least rigorous tasks where they can't fuck it up too much for the others. This is also good preparation for later life when the same thing happens at work. In America.

    Group projects are a travesty and an abdication of all educational responsibility. The transfer intellectual wealth to the undeserving, they exist to let teachers not fail people. After a while, when it was an option, I would take a lower grade to not have to do projects with groups (I still did the work and the rest of my grades would be fine), which is obviously not good advice but only mentioned to underscore the purity of my hatred for group projects. I can’t imagine a group project that would serve a student better than making fundamentals solid.
    In the workforce the desire will be for people with solid fundamentals, not a novel speculation on how a business enterprise would probably go. Imagine an army that replaced basic training and drill with a research-informed roundtable discussion on what combat is probably like. Now imagine that army fighting an army that did real education.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Group projects were highly educational for me in MBA school in terms of teaching me how not to wind up doing all the work myself.
  97. @Johann Ricke

    She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they’ve had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes.
     
    Maybe they're just soulless grinds with no lives. Whereas Steve Jobs and Bill Gates partied it up all day and all night and yet managed build megacorps in their spare time. If your life isn't like a trailer from American Pie (the movie) rerun in a loop, maybe you're doing it wrong.

    If these people were professionally concerned with law or culture or our civil society, and they uttered the insipid engineer’s dictum that “the humanities are easy because they are subjective,” you could mock their work ethic. The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math. It’s like an athletic skill. My life would be materially better in every respect had I been enslaved and forced to study math like a Han, and among plans for my life until the civil war kicks off is the notion to study the math I weaseled out of studying earlier, not as a moral thing but because I need it after all.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math.
     
    Whereas you get better at everything else by partying it up. Never forget - genius is 99% inspiration and 1% perspiration. You never know what you'll learn by finishing bowl after bowl of the finest Kashmir Kush. Hard work is for incel losers.
  98. @Eagle Eye
    Interesting that this Social Credit Adjustment Mechanism (SCAM) takes into account generic neighborhood "housing values" etc. but skips past a much more important value - family net worth.


    The rating will not affect students’ test scores, and will be reported only to college admissions officials as part of a larger package of data on each test taker.
     
    This is beyond creepy. Also, how EXACTLY are the scores computed? Will parents need to pay thousands of dollars to cram schools to get the real scoop on how these scores are computed?

    PREDICTION - it will be only a matter of days before college application consultants surface their first advice packages to game the new system, e.g. by moving students into marginal but conveniently accessible high schools for their junior year, faking residence in advantageous (i.e. disadvantaged) neighborhoods, etc.

    The military used to put a negligible little alphanumeric code on DD214s (the paper you show your prospective employer as a kind of resume) which would reveal potentially damning criticisms that were officially secret. I fear this will be something like that job-killing paper whisper.

  99. @jim jones
    UK Police fine man for avoiding facial recognition camera:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-16/uk-cops-fine-pedestrian-115-avoiding-facial-recognition-camera-public-street

    Way too long. The facial recognition cameras of the future will hurt you if you look like you’re deliberately avoiding them.

  100. @J.Ross
    Group projects are a travesty and an abdication of all educational responsibility. The transfer intellectual wealth to the undeserving, they exist to let teachers not fail people. After a while, when it was an option, I would take a lower grade to not have to do projects with groups (I still did the work and the rest of my grades would be fine), which is obviously not good advice but only mentioned to underscore the purity of my hatred for group projects. I can't imagine a group project that would serve a student better than making fundamentals solid.
    In the workforce the desire will be for people with solid fundamentals, not a novel speculation on how a business enterprise would probably go. Imagine an army that replaced basic training and drill with a research-informed roundtable discussion on what combat is probably like. Now imagine that army fighting an army that did real education.

    Group projects were highly educational for me in MBA school in terms of teaching me how not to wind up doing all the work myself.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    My hatred of group work derives to a great extent from being the idiot that did a disproportionate amount of the work.
    , @Desiderius
    A grossly underrated skill. The Orange Man seems to have it down.
    , @anon
    A graduate of the Senior MBA class got a prize for his thesis. In the ceremony he thanked all his sub-ordinates at his company for helping him in the thesis.
  101. @J.Ross
    If these people were professionally concerned with law or culture or our civil society, and they uttered the insipid engineer's dictum that "the humanities are easy because they are subjective," you could mock their work ethic. The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math. It's like an athletic skill. My life would be materially better in every respect had I been enslaved and forced to study math like a Han, and among plans for my life until the civil war kicks off is the notion to study the math I weaseled out of studying earlier, not as a moral thing but because I need it after all.

    The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math.

    Whereas you get better at everything else by partying it up. Never forget – genius is 99% inspiration and 1% perspiration. You never know what you’ll learn by finishing bowl after bowl of the finest Kashmir Kush. Hard work is for incel losers.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
    , @J.Ross
    Is this German sarcasm?
  102. @Steve Sailer
    Group projects were highly educational for me in MBA school in terms of teaching me how not to wind up doing all the work myself.

    My hatred of group work derives to a great extent from being the idiot that did a disproportionate amount of the work.

  103. @Thea
    This may end up leveling out the reputation of a lot of colleges. The mediocrity will get spread around and a lot of top students will wind up at the local state U that otherwise couldn’t have convinced them to attend.

    That’s already been happening for quite awhile, with the winners being those students themselves, their schools, and their communities. The losers are the discriminating elite (sic) schools, the mismatched, and the narrow-minded who recruit there, such as the national media, with predictable results.

  104. @Steve Sailer
    Group projects were highly educational for me in MBA school in terms of teaching me how not to wind up doing all the work myself.

    A grossly underrated skill. The Orange Man seems to have it down.

  105. @Johann Ricke

    The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math.
     
    Whereas you get better at everything else by partying it up. Never forget - genius is 99% inspiration and 1% perspiration. You never know what you'll learn by finishing bowl after bowl of the finest Kashmir Kush. Hard work is for incel losers.
  106. @Redneck farmer
    NO! Your kids foster parents are descendants of Southern Abolitionists. That will maximize their scores.

    You, sir, have a bright future in any college admissions consulting service. Southern Abolitionist is perfect.

  107. @Johann Ricke

    The subject in question is math. You get better at math when you do a lot of math.
     
    Whereas you get better at everything else by partying it up. Never forget - genius is 99% inspiration and 1% perspiration. You never know what you'll learn by finishing bowl after bowl of the finest Kashmir Kush. Hard work is for incel losers.

    Is this German sarcasm?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Obv.

    Grinds do tend to underrate the utility of the learning that happens via partying, group work, and reading great literature.

  108. Remember “queen for a day”

  109. @Johann Ricke

    She is learning the advanced math that she needs for her classes as she goes along but the foreign students (not just Asian but European) already know it from undergrad because they’ve had more (and more rigorous) math in their classes.
     
    Maybe they're just soulless grinds with no lives. Whereas Steve Jobs and Bill Gates partied it up all day and all night and yet managed build megacorps in their spare time. If your life isn't like a trailer from American Pie (the movie) rerun in a loop, maybe you're doing it wrong.

    The truth is somewhere in the middle workload-wise but there’s no excuse for the lack of rigour and quantity of utter bullshit stateside.

  110. @J.Ross
    Is this German sarcasm?

    Obv.

    Grinds do tend to underrate the utility of the learning that happens via partying, group work, and reading great literature.

  111. @Steve Sailer
    Group projects were highly educational for me in MBA school in terms of teaching me how not to wind up doing all the work myself.

    A graduate of the Senior MBA class got a prize for his thesis. In the ceremony he thanked all his sub-ordinates at his company for helping him in the thesis.

  112. @prime noticer
    now, i didn't have time to go back and check every president of the college board over time, because they made it hard to figure this stuff out, so i only went back to the 70s, which is also fine, because that's when things started to change anyway. dates may be off by 1 year or so. without further discussion, here are the presidents of the college board, since 1972 or so:

    sidney marland 1972/73-1979. president of what was then called the college entrance examination board. a liberal who served under nixon, a vocal opponent of school segregation who seemed to like to threaten to send guys with rifles to force old school southerners to admit africans to their public schools. marland also served in the prototype version of what eventually became the US department of education.

    marland published a well known document in 1972 called the marland report, an open attack on intelligence, where he sought to redefine giftedness as a broad range of abilities, instead of just being about intelligence. his views would be in direct opposition to a man such as lewis terman.

    george hanford 1979-1986. the beginning of the change in earnest. hanford served at the college board for 30 years, and was probably some kind of suck up, like NFL commissioner goodell today.

    facing constant attacks that the SAT discriminated, hanford opened commissions starting in 1980 to study whether it was in fact biased against various groups. hanford did defend the SAT as fair, and as something which could identify high ability vibrant-americans based on their test performance alone, offering them a better future, versus a future where standardized testing was eliminated and those diamond in the rough kids would never get into a college. nevertheless, after years of working with people attacking the SAT, he probably deliberately hired -

    donald stewart 1986-1999. a mulatto who was president of spelman college from 1976-1986. he's the guy who did the most damage. basically a one man campaign against the SAT and standardized testing in general, exactly as you would expect. first he changed the name of the test. then the re-center of the test, to lower the ceiling.

    gaston caperton 1999-2012. a democrat from west virginia. the idiot who added the essay. a zero, nothing person. standard issue educrat. around this time is when the ACT began to supplant the SAT. for now obvious reasons.

    (david coleman) 2012-2019. i don't think we need to say anymore. first he ruined the test. eliminated a century's worth of work developing good SAT questions, replacing them with crap. now he will simply add bonus points for vibrant people, as jews have always wanted to do.

    over the decades, we observe the leftist position being taken to it's ultimate conclusion. a great thing created by european men passes thru several hands, moving steadily leftward, until eventually a jewish guy controls the entire enterprise, and he ruins it in total. almost everything works this way, and this could be said to be the social science version of gravity. all social things move from european man to jewish man in a linear fashion.

    Thanks dude. This was enlightening. And all too familiar.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?