The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
U. of California Faculty Endorses SAT/ACT Testing
🔊 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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Not all zeitgeist trends are overwhelmingly powerful. From the Los Angeles Times:

UC should keep SAT and ACT as admission requirements, faculty report says
SAT to be revamped

By TERESA WATANABE STAFF WRITER
FEB. 3, 2020 6:04 PM

University of California faculty leaders are recommending the continued use of the controversial SAT and ACT as an admission requirement for now, citing UC data showing the standardized tests may actually help boost enrollment of disadvantaged students, according to a highly anticipated report released Monday.

The preliminary recommendation by the Academic Senate’s executive committee comes amid enormous legal and political pressure to drop the tests, which opponents say fail to adequately predict college success and unfairly discriminate on the basis of race, income and parent education levels.

… Any rejection of the faculty’s final recommendations by the board, which is set to vote on the issue in May, would overturn traditional practice and spark a political firestorm.

The new yearlong faculty review found evidence that most UC admissions officers offset much of the bias against disadvantaged students by evaluating standardized test scores in the context of their high schools and neighborhoods. Applicants’ tests scores, for instance, are compared both to those statewide and at the local high school, enabling UC officers to identify standouts among students with similar socioeconomic backgrounds.

In other words, U of C engages in intentional discrimination that violates the California constitution, as amended by Proposition 209 in 1996:

That process results in higher admission rates for less-advantaged applicants for any given test score, a finding that faculty review committee members said surprised them. Among students with SAT scores of 1000 — the 40th percentile — half of Latinos were admitted compared to less than one-third of whites. The review found similar advantages for students who are low-income and the first in their families to attend college. …

The report also found that test scores are a better predictor of college performance than high school grades but that UC weighs grades more heavily in admission decisions.

From the report:

The SAT explains 21% of the variance in freshman grades at U of California campuses, compared to only 16% for high school grade point averages. The SAT (or, presumably, ACT) are better than GPA at distinguishing promising applicants among most groups other than whites and the affluent, where the GPA is better.

Combining high school GPA and SAT scores increases the variance “explained” to 26%.

For instance, among students admitted with SAT scores below 700, 35% left UC after only one year and only 50% graduated within seven years; among students admitted with SAT scores above 1400, only 3% were not retained past freshman year and 92% graduated within seven years.

Predictive validity: Standardized test scores provide information beyond what is available in HSGPA. Contrary to the narrative that is commonly expressed, the information available in test scores is not redundant with the information available in grades. Even among students with similar high school academic records, we still see a substantial relationship between test scores and college retention, grades, and graduation. For any given high school GPA, a student admitted with a low SAT score is between two and five times more likely to drop out after one year, and up to three times less likely to complete their degree compared to a student with a high score

It looks like the highest GPA at graduation is earned by whites with SAT scores over 1450 and GPAs of 4.25 or higher. They appear to do slightly better than Asians with similar credentials. Or maybe they take easier classes?

 
Hide 91 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    "In Defense of Holocaust Obsession". LOL.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Remember when Ron unleashed the Loma Prieta and Northridge quakes? Wild stuff.
    , @El Dato
    Soundtrack:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd8WjeK8riE

    These are the guys who provided the music for the Matrix shootout scene, "SpyBreak!"
  2. Anon[188] • Disclaimer says:

    How dare they use charts and statistics in their report! That’s so totally racist. Aren’t there any PoC’s on the committee?

    Over the long term, the report recommended that UC develop its own assessments for admissions — but notes that process could take nine years.

    As Education Realist notes on Twitter, a new test, even one nine years in the making, is not going to have any real effect on the gap nor on the rank order of applicants. Any test is a cognitive test, plus noise. What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?

    Even if they made a sort of Chitling Test or BITCH-100 test, all that would be accomplished is that a few entrepreneurial blacks would get rich tutoring Asians and whites in such questions as:

    3. Mother’s Day: a) Black independence day ) a day when mothers are honored c) a day the welfare checks come in d) every first Sunday in church

    9. “Jet” is: (a) an East Oakland motorcycle club, (b) one of the gangs in “West Side Story,” (c) a news and gossip magazine, (d) a way of life for the very rich.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitling_Test

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Intelligence_Test_of_Cultural_Homogeneity

    • Replies: @Russ

    What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?
     
    In the corporate world, we have just been taught in our latest Diversity Inclusion Equity Yearly Training (DIE YT) that "Emotional Quotient" is a thing. Perhaps enterprising educators can both categorize it as an overarchingly favorable attribute, and correlate it strongly to performance traits such as soul and rhythm.
  3. Anon[188] • Disclaimer says:

    I don’t think that the UC system uses grade point average in the way you’re implying. They don’t offer admission to all applicants by grade point average, nor by school-adjusted grade point average. They offer admission to the top 9 percent by grade point average of each high school in California. This trick was developed by Texas state universities, and has spread like wildfire.

    You get a lot of boneheads from ghetto high schools who drop out immediately. UC originally used 5 percent, like Texas, then upped it to 10 percent, and now use 9 percent, which seems to be the sweet spot. Of course, blacks in the 10 to 20 percent range at good high schools are smarter than those in the top 9 percent at bad high schools, but that wouldn’t be a “race neutral” policy.

    • Replies: @JosephB
    I like the policy of top X% from each high school is admitted to the state university. There are smart kids in extremely bad situations. The SAT will pick out some of them (heck, that's why it was invented); but I strongly suspect some students will be missed.

    However, X needs to be much smaller. 9% seems crazy high. Accepting the best 2% from each high school could be reasonable. If you can't get into that group at the HS, you're not worth gambling on.
    , @Erik L
    I wonder if any parents have been brave enough to send their average kid to a terrible school in order to get into Berkeley or UCLA.
    , @Penskefile
    In Texas, state law mandates the top 10% but schools may choose to be more selective. UT Austin now only guarantees admission to the top 6% and word is, it will likely narrow further to the top 4% in the next decade

    None of that guarantees admission to the highly selective computer science, engineering or business programs. Just to the school of liberal arts by the way.
    , @Hypnotoad666
    Steve usually hones in on the statistical oddities and anomalies in these reports, but I think he may have missed one here. Take a look at the last chart for "non-graduation rate" of whites as a function of SAT score.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student's SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Of course, if these results applied to black students there would be a great hue and cry about how systemic bias and a "hostile" environment are forcing out qualified PoC. So maybe these results are evidence of academia's current hostility to Whites (it would be interesting to see a breakdown by sex as well).

    On the other hand, maybe higher IQ Whites are smart enough to figure out that a college degree isn't all it's cracked up to be, and are dropping out (a la Gates and Zuckerberg), for greener pastures in self-employment or the trades. Who knows.

    But since it doesn't fit the "unfair to marginalized people" narrative, you can bet that no one will be curious enough to figure it out.
  4. Not found anywhere in the article: the letters “IQ”.

    • Replies: @Realist

    Not found anywhere in the article: the letters “IQ”.
     
    IQ does not exist...it is a social construct.
  5. the controversial SAT and ACT

    Get that? “Controversial,” like “problematic.” Usually translates as “I don’t like it and I don’t want you to like it, but I don’t have any evidence and there might even be evidences to the contrary.”

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    That jumped out at me too. It's not the universally used, 70 year-old test that is "controversial." It's the idea of suddenly ditching it for a woke diversity agenda that is "controversial."

    I also liked the unexplained reference to "less advantaged students." No need to explain who that is referring to.

    , @Redneck farmer
    "Repeat a lie often enough....."
    , @El Dato
    Well, Miss Teresa Watanabe Staff Writer is at least partly japanese, going by the name, so that's probably not her personal opinion.
  6. @Reg Cæsar
    https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/TNR-Unz.jpg

    “In Defense of Holocaust Obsession”. LOL.

  7. @Anon
    How dare they use charts and statistics in their report! That's so totally racist. Aren't there any PoC's on the committee?

    Over the long term, the report recommended that UC develop its own assessments for admissions — but notes that process could take nine years.
     
    As Education Realist notes on Twitter, a new test, even one nine years in the making, is not going to have any real effect on the gap nor on the rank order of applicants. Any test is a cognitive test, plus noise. What questions could they possibly come up with that aren't cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?

    Even if they made a sort of Chitling Test or BITCH-100 test, all that would be accomplished is that a few entrepreneurial blacks would get rich tutoring Asians and whites in such questions as:

    3. Mother's Day: a) Black independence day ) a day when mothers are honored c) a day the welfare checks come in d) every first Sunday in church

    9. "Jet" is: (a) an East Oakland motorcycle club, (b) one of the gangs in "West Side Story," (c) a news and gossip magazine, (d) a way of life for the very rich.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitling_Test

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Intelligence_Test_of_Cultural_Homogeneity

    What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?

    In the corporate world, we have just been taught in our latest Diversity Inclusion Equity Yearly Training (DIE YT) that “Emotional Quotient” is a thing. Perhaps enterprising educators can both categorize it as an overarchingly favorable attribute, and correlate it strongly to performance traits such as soul and rhythm.

    • Replies: @Aardvark
    I noticed they have not added a category to our time reporting system for "Recognizing implicit bias". But, we're supposed to be thinking about it and then combating it.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    What is the numerator and denominator of an Emotional Quotient?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotient

    , @NOTA
    Didn't Harvard pioneer the EQ over IQ idea, when they used low scores for sociability as a way to justify rejecting a bunch of Asian applicants.
    , @Olorin
    Oh, academia is doing this too, Russ. I.e., writing performance reviews on the basis of one crazy lady or tranny or quad screamer b!tching about whatever whatever from an interaction with someone s/h/e didn't like...and that gets foisted onto the attacked individual as his (usually) shortcoming that must be fixed with...well, it's not clear what, since the grift is rigged so that the attacked individual never can win. So to answer Jim Don Bob's question, the denominator is 0.

    Just count on the inevitability of this year's Feminist Encounter Group-Flavored batguano touchyfeely passive-aggressive politicking "research" becoming engraved-in-stone HR practice in 5 to 7 years. This is how academics maintain their end of the grift. It's as James Lileks once said, "Fashion: it's a maze in a labyrinth of funhouse mirrors, and you're always lost and wrong."

    However we can rest assured that Dr. LaQuanda Quetzalfeather-ben-Arkancide, Ed.D. (blir/blur pronouns) will be happy to apprise everyone of the day's appropriate religious forms and devotions in thousands-of-words memos of polysyllabic opacity. Bearing in mind that you're going to hell anyway.

  8. It might seem obvious, but the news here is that a California institution is insisting … ok, that might be a bit strong … suggesting some standards are useful.

  9. @Reg Cæsar
    https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/TNR-Unz.jpg

    Remember when Ron unleashed the Loma Prieta and Northridge quakes? Wild stuff.

    • LOL: Mr McKenna
  10. @Twinkie

    the controversial SAT and ACT
     
    Get that? "Controversial," like "problematic." Usually translates as "I don't like it and I don't want you to like it, but I don't have any evidence and there might even be evidences to the contrary."

    That jumped out at me too. It’s not the universally used, 70 year-old test that is “controversial.” It’s the idea of suddenly ditching it for a woke diversity agenda that is “controversial.”

    I also liked the unexplained reference to “less advantaged students.” No need to explain who that is referring to.

  11. @Twinkie

    the controversial SAT and ACT
     
    Get that? "Controversial," like "problematic." Usually translates as "I don't like it and I don't want you to like it, but I don't have any evidence and there might even be evidences to the contrary."

    “Repeat a lie often enough…..”

  12. It looks like the highest GPA at graduation is earned by whites with SAT scores over 1450 and GPAs of 4.25 or higher. They appear to do slightly better than Asians with similar credentials. Or maybe they take easier classes?

    Or, maybe the few top white kids [grudgingly] admitted into the UCs have to be the best of the best to get in while many of the top Asian kids who are admitted are, when push comes to shove, not quite as impressive. I.e., the test prep and tutoring distorts actual performance and it’s revealed in the college GPAs. What a race traitor you are sometimes, Steve.

    Whites are quite the [discriminated against] minority at the UCs these days so the ones that get in are really top notch. The ones I know of that got into UCLA and Cal from our high school not only had 4.7+ GPAs with a dozen+ of the toughest APs on their transcripts but were also four year varsity athletes, which is an enormous time commitment. From what I’ve observed, the Asian kids that get into the UCs tend to focus their extracurriculars in other areas such as clubs and volunteering so perhaps don’t master time management as well.

    Additionally, I’d guess the test scores of the white kids were more organic and not as inflated by massive test prep as the Asian kids. I’d also guess the white kids were more independent when it came to mastering the material for their AP classes versus taking the class through a test prep place the summer before and using “study groups” (coughcheatingcirclescough) to prep enough to do well on the tests but not truly absorb the material.

    Lastly, maybe Asian kids don’t do as well at college compared to high school because Tiger Mom isn’t there to ride their ass 24/7.

    Anecdotally, in quite the stereotype swap, my son’s freshman year Asian roommates were a partier who liked to get drunk and high and a kid who didn’t come back after first quarter, while the white boys were the studious grind engineering students.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Asians are more likely to take STEM classes than other groups that have harder grading. This has been covered in past discussions.
    , @Kratoklastes

    The ones I know of that got into UCLA and Cal from our high school not only had 4.7+ GPAs
     
    Oh for fuck's sake... so now GPA doesn't stop at 4 in the sub-standard Yanklish system?

    Fucking Yanks - they have to debauch every grading system so that their retarded snowflake kiddies don't have aneurysms and need yet another psychotropic.

    Eventually everyone will be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics and the Fields Medal on the day they're born - and by then US PIAAC scores will be akin to what you would get if you sampled from a population of 300 million mongoloids.

    I've always been moderately proud of being a '4.0' guy; pre-credentialism you got that by being in the top 3 or 4 students in your graduating class, based on standardised examinations - the final exam (85% weight) being 3 or 4 hours per subject, administered over the entire (state-wide) final-year-of-high-school population, none of which included "pick-a-box" (multiple-choice).

    The highest high school grade was 'A', and was awarded to about the top 5% of a class. In a matriculating class of 300 there might be 1 student who got all 'A's (I didn't: I got a 'B' for Chemistry). Any kid who got 4 or 5 'A's was exceptional (it was good enough to get into Medicine or Law).

    .

    Now we have had to follow the Yanks and Poms into the mire, and upwards of 20% of the final year high school class gets more than 1 'A', and what used to be year 11 Pure Maths is now final year "Advanced Placement" Mathematics (FFS) and half the exam is multiple choice (FFS), with no requirement no 'show your working' on long-form questions (FFS).

    .

    Likewise at University level - in my jurisdiction in my graduating year, if you got straight 'High Distinctions' in 4th year (the Honours year) you were guaranteed to graduate with a 'First' (summa cum laude in the US taxonomy)... and your GPA was 4.0 - the maximum possible.

    If none of the top 3 or 4 students got straight HD's, they would still graduate with a First - which seems fair since that would put them in the top 0.6% of the faculty's graduates, and entry cutoffs were high enough that you had to be in the top 5% of high school graduates to get in. A First guaranteed a scholarship for Masters and PhD, and fee waivers and a TA gig.

    My alma mater - Monash U - is ranked #32 globally in my discipline (Economics/Econometrics), above UCLA.

    Monash Econ gets shit marks on citation and citation-impact scores nowadays, because a key research engine-room - the Centre of Policy Studies (an economic forecasting think tank I was part of in the 90s) - left for a different university as people became more pissed off with the drop in standards that is inexorable if the administrative leadership decides size is more important than quality.

    Overall, it's ranked #59 globally now - well below UCLA (#14), and reasonably respectable globally - but it's fallen roughly a spot a year for the last 20 years.

    The reason for the fall is typical of US-led managerialism-in-education: in the late 1990s its then Vice Chancellor tried to turn Monash into a UC-style model (i.e., several campuses, most of which are shit) instead of trying to continue to be a high-quality single-campus university. Turns out there's much more money to be made by pretending to educate retards.

    /OKBoomer
  13. higher admission rates for less-advantaged applicants for any given test score, a finding that faculty review committee members said surprised them.

    Shows how out of touch they are.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    That’s a condition of employment.

    Reality is bad touch.
    , @Rosie
    Yes, that is tremendously important. A working-class kid who didn't grow up in a house that values learning may get a spectacular SAT score to level the playing field.
    , @anon
    It's called "holistic" admissions...
  14. Getting good grades is, in part, a game: strategic choice of courses, willingness to cheat, persistent post-exam pestering of professors. It stands to reason then that whoever excelled at this game in high school, will keep it up in college.

    I’ve had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.

    • Replies: @El Dato

    I’ve had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.
     
    I regret not doing that, it would probably have given me a better score on Neural Networks. I had read the whole book instead of the low-brow course material, but then failed at the practical exercises hard. But I'm not into begging.
    , @Joe, Averaged
    Smarter people are better at doing all of those things you mention.
    , @Kratoklastes

    I’ve had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.
     
    Only numbskulls that are within small-ε below a grade boundary do that shit - which is why it has always been common practice to ensure that students who do not belong in the higher grade, get results that are far enough from the boundary to have no incentive to attempt finagling.

    Every instructor knows (or ought to) which kids belong in which grade - perhaps with the exception of compulsory first-year classes where lecture halls are full and there's a seething throng of 'tards who are literally a waste of resources (but a critical part of the revenue stream).

    Best strategy for finaglers is to find ways to 'notice' things where marks ought to be deducted. Find a few punctuation or spelling errors, or 'notice' that the phrasing is not to the expected standard... soon enough the 'tards stop trying to 'tard their way up a grade.

    In my day it was always 'Pass' (~D) students trying to finagle their way to a 'Credit' (~C) - and invariably in first-year undergraduate subjects. To (partially) obviate this, any student whose 'raw' mark was 1% below a grade boundary, would be adjusted to 3% below the grade boundary. Only the dimmest would fail to understand that 3% is unlikely to be made up by finagling.

    That's just the way shit happens when the TAs are doing their job properly: the stratification of the class is done by a smart person who knows the students (and if there's more than 1 TA, the TAs work out who's what).

    More to the point, potential finaglers are given an incentive to do the fucking work rather than trying to improve their finagling skills.

    TAs tend to be pretty merciless, because at half-decent schools they are (generally) elite students, who would never have required finagling to materially affect their GPA.

    At the end of the day, TA 'finagling management' is a victimless crime: most finagling seeks to avoid the dreaded "third quartile" (people who pass); anybody who needs to finagle in all subjects, is massively unlikely to get to a Credit average overall; a Credit average renders the entire degree a waste of time.

    So even if the finaglers managed to drag their 'tard averages up to Credit: if someone graduates with a Credit average, nobody gives a fuck if it's 65 or 75, because it signals that they don't know shit about the subject (anyone who averages ~65% is ~20 percentage points - 2 grades - shy of being domain-competent).

    And if anyone is trying to finagle their way to a Distinction, then they should just fuck right off (and they'll still be a grade short of domain-competence).

    To reframe this for a Yank audience: a Credit average would be a GPA of 2.6-ish on [0,4]. If you have a GPA of 2.6 at the end of a 4 year degree in a discipline, you don't know shit about that discipline. (If you only do a 3 year degree in a discipline, you don't know shit almost regardless of your GPA).

  15. The SAT (or, presumably, ACT) are better than GPA at distinguishing promising applicants among most groups other than whites and the affluent, where the GPA is better.

    Would IQ be a better predictor than SAT or GPA?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    IQ is too Divisive.
    , @Svevlad
    Nah, too generalized a measure

    However, if we could quantify and perfectly identify the g factor... That could do it
    , @William Badwhite

    Would IQ be a better predictor than SAT or GPA?

     

    I seem to recall IQ and SAT scores being fairly well correlated. I recall back in the day Steve estimated Gore & GWB's SAT scores using their military entrance exam scores, converting to IQ along the way. Or maybe I added a step that wasn't there.
  16. @AnonAnon

    It looks like the highest GPA at graduation is earned by whites with SAT scores over 1450 and GPAs of 4.25 or higher. They appear to do slightly better than Asians with similar credentials. Or maybe they take easier classes?
     
    Or, maybe the few top white kids [grudgingly] admitted into the UCs have to be the best of the best to get in while many of the top Asian kids who are admitted are, when push comes to shove, not quite as impressive. I.e., the test prep and tutoring distorts actual performance and it’s revealed in the college GPAs. What a race traitor you are sometimes, Steve.

    Whites are quite the [discriminated against] minority at the UCs these days so the ones that get in are really top notch. The ones I know of that got into UCLA and Cal from our high school not only had 4.7+ GPAs with a dozen+ of the toughest APs on their transcripts but were also four year varsity athletes, which is an enormous time commitment. From what I’ve observed, the Asian kids that get into the UCs tend to focus their extracurriculars in other areas such as clubs and volunteering so perhaps don’t master time management as well.

    Additionally, I’d guess the test scores of the white kids were more organic and not as inflated by massive test prep as the Asian kids. I’d also guess the white kids were more independent when it came to mastering the material for their AP classes versus taking the class through a test prep place the summer before and using “study groups” (coughcheatingcirclescough) to prep enough to do well on the tests but not truly absorb the material.

    Lastly, maybe Asian kids don’t do as well at college compared to high school because Tiger Mom isn’t there to ride their ass 24/7.

    Anecdotally, in quite the stereotype swap, my son’s freshman year Asian roommates were a partier who liked to get drunk and high and a kid who didn’t come back after first quarter, while the white boys were the studious grind engineering students.

    Asians are more likely to take STEM classes than other groups that have harder grading. This has been covered in past discussions.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Ask not for whom regression to the mean comes.

    It comes for thee.
    , @Autochthon
    To use the accepted vernacular of colour:

    Us white people be like:

    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/d6/ac/25d6accc7b019af5e850427d5cbc4d1d.jpg

    "Let's go to the moon!"



    https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/system/news_items/main_images/337_s69-39961.jpg

    Orientals like Twinkie be all:

    https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/t/angry-asian-man-portrait-funny-mad-face-angry-face-asian-man-portrait-97908255.jpg

    "We're as good at science and math as you are!"
  17. @Twinkie

    the controversial SAT and ACT
     
    Get that? "Controversial," like "problematic." Usually translates as "I don't like it and I don't want you to like it, but I don't have any evidence and there might even be evidences to the contrary."

    Well, Miss Teresa Watanabe Staff Writer is at least partly japanese, going by the name, so that’s probably not her personal opinion.

  18. @International Jew
    Getting good grades is, in part, a game: strategic choice of courses, willingness to cheat, persistent post-exam pestering of professors. It stands to reason then that whoever excelled at this game in high school, will keep it up in college.

    I've had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.

    I’ve had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.

    I regret not doing that, it would probably have given me a better score on Neural Networks. I had read the whole book instead of the low-brow course material, but then failed at the practical exercises hard. But I’m not into begging.

  19. @Reg Cæsar
    https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/TNR-Unz.jpg

    Soundtrack:

    These are the guys who provided the music for the Matrix shootout scene, “SpyBreak!”

  20. • Replies: @Prester John
    "DR. DREW PINSKY HITS ADAM SCHIFF ON HOMELESS CRISIS IN HIS OWN DISTRICT: 'HE'S ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL' "

    Too busy trying to protect the Ukraine. LoL.
  21. @International Jew

    higher admission rates for less-advantaged applicants for any given test score, a finding that faculty review committee members said surprised them.
     
    Shows how out of touch they are.

    That’s a condition of employment.

    Reality is bad touch.

  22. @Twinkie
    Asians are more likely to take STEM classes than other groups that have harder grading. This has been covered in past discussions.

    Ask not for whom regression to the mean comes.

    It comes for thee.

    • LOL: El Dato
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Ask not for whom regression to the mean comes.

    It comes for thee.
     
    Marry well.
  23. @TelfoedJohn

    The SAT (or, presumably, ACT) are better than GPA at distinguishing promising applicants among most groups other than whites and the affluent, where the GPA is better.
     
    Would IQ be a better predictor than SAT or GPA?

    IQ is too Divisive.

  24. @Russ

    What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?
     
    In the corporate world, we have just been taught in our latest Diversity Inclusion Equity Yearly Training (DIE YT) that "Emotional Quotient" is a thing. Perhaps enterprising educators can both categorize it as an overarchingly favorable attribute, and correlate it strongly to performance traits such as soul and rhythm.

    I noticed they have not added a category to our time reporting system for “Recognizing implicit bias”. But, we’re supposed to be thinking about it and then combating it.

  25. I suspect some of this is motivated by the faculty recognizing that if they have to game things to ensure the appropriate racial mix, they’d rather have some metric to pick the best of the worst, rather than go in essentially blind with applicant statements and 3.5 GPAs from schools that only get their kids to a 10th grade level.

  26. @Michael S
    Not found anywhere in the article: the letters "IQ".

    Not found anywhere in the article: the letters “IQ”.

    IQ does not exist…it is a social construct.

  27. I suspect that HSGPA and SAT/ACT are different indicators of some combination of
    Intelligence (self-explanitory)
    Conscientiousness, (more important for grades?)
    Neuroticism. (test anxiety, ability to focus, and so forth)

    Another commenter makes reasonable arguments about how indicate agreeableness (negative) and extroversion could goose up grades.

    I’d be interested at looking at variation the data after stratification. Averages don’t tell you much about individuals. The variation and source of variation matter a lot.

    For example, it may be easier for a high SAT student to get partied out of school than for a low SAT student to up his/her game.

  28. @Anon
    I don't think that the UC system uses grade point average in the way you're implying. They don't offer admission to all applicants by grade point average, nor by school-adjusted grade point average. They offer admission to the top 9 percent by grade point average of each high school in California. This trick was developed by Texas state universities, and has spread like wildfire.

    You get a lot of boneheads from ghetto high schools who drop out immediately. UC originally used 5 percent, like Texas, then upped it to 10 percent, and now use 9 percent, which seems to be the sweet spot. Of course, blacks in the 10 to 20 percent range at good high schools are smarter than those in the top 9 percent at bad high schools, but that wouldn't be a "race neutral" policy.

    I like the policy of top X% from each high school is admitted to the state university. There are smart kids in extremely bad situations. The SAT will pick out some of them (heck, that’s why it was invented); but I strongly suspect some students will be missed.

    However, X needs to be much smaller. 9% seems crazy high. Accepting the best 2% from each high school could be reasonable. If you can’t get into that group at the HS, you’re not worth gambling on.

  29. The degree to which the University of California is meritocratic probably depends on the specific campus.

    UC Berkeley seems to mirror Caltech in that there appears to be no quota for Asian-Americans, who make up 43.1% of the UC Berkeley intake. This mostly consists of Chinese-Americans, who make up 17.3% of the intake, and Indian-Americans, who make up 11.5% of the intake.

    It’s good to see that they’ve internalized the finding that standardized testing actually helps to boost the chances of low-income, black and Hispanic students, as compared with other, more subjective, methods.

    https://www.pnas.org/content/113/48/13678

  30. @Russ

    What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?
     
    In the corporate world, we have just been taught in our latest Diversity Inclusion Equity Yearly Training (DIE YT) that "Emotional Quotient" is a thing. Perhaps enterprising educators can both categorize it as an overarchingly favorable attribute, and correlate it strongly to performance traits such as soul and rhythm.

    What is the numerator and denominator of an Emotional Quotient?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotient

  31. @Anon
    I don't think that the UC system uses grade point average in the way you're implying. They don't offer admission to all applicants by grade point average, nor by school-adjusted grade point average. They offer admission to the top 9 percent by grade point average of each high school in California. This trick was developed by Texas state universities, and has spread like wildfire.

    You get a lot of boneheads from ghetto high schools who drop out immediately. UC originally used 5 percent, like Texas, then upped it to 10 percent, and now use 9 percent, which seems to be the sweet spot. Of course, blacks in the 10 to 20 percent range at good high schools are smarter than those in the top 9 percent at bad high schools, but that wouldn't be a "race neutral" policy.

    I wonder if any parents have been brave enough to send their average kid to a terrible school in order to get into Berkeley or UCLA.

    • Replies: @Abolish_public_education
    I’ve heard that a few years ago a White kid finished #1 at a crappy public high school (aren’t they all?), vast majority Black, in Oakland.

    The kid went on to Stanfürd.
    , @petit bourgeois
    That's what I did to get into Cal Berkeley. I went to a really crappy community college (ranked 103 out of 106 in California at the time and in one of the poorest zip codes in the US). I had a pretty high GPA with no standardized tests. Berkeley grades on a strict curve (unlike Harvard which has rampant grade inflation). This means that while it's possible to get in, those kids who fall into the left side of the Bell curve in grades do not graduate. SAT or ACT or not, there's not ever going to be a substitute for high IQ. The dumb kids never graduate (unless they're Ethnic Studies or sociology majors, which degrees are worthless in the real world).

    It also helps if you only apply to one UC. The application wants you to list your first three choices. So say you list Cal, UCLA and Davis. They'll put you in the least prestigious UC. I only put one school on the application, UC Berkeley, which puts the admissions officer in a situation: if they denied my application, I would not transfer and continue my education. Somehow they let my ass in and I got my BA in 45 weeks of instruction (3 semesters, as Berkeley is the only school in the UC system that still has semesters, far more rigorous than the quarter system at the other UCs).

    It's not just the admissions office that's breaking the law and violating Prop 209 / California constitution. The hiring practices for every job at UC discriminate too. They just don't call them "quotas" anymore but "placement goals" which discriminate based on sex and race. To wit:

    https://hr.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/job-groups-for-strategic-outreach-2019a.pdf
  32. @International Jew

    higher admission rates for less-advantaged applicants for any given test score, a finding that faculty review committee members said surprised them.
     
    Shows how out of touch they are.

    Yes, that is tremendously important. A working-class kid who didn’t grow up in a house that values learning may get a spectacular SAT score to level the playing field.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @res
    Agreed. And those kids might be even more impressive than the score indicates if they are motivated and encouraged to learn (e.g. they probably haven't heavily test prepped and are unlikely to have grown up in a house full of books). I think the SAT recentering in 1995 hurt this group by making it less possible to achieve a "spectacular SAT score" given the lower ceiling. Lots (relative to ~10 per year pre-recentering) of people score 1600 these days.

    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/02/perfect-act-sat-scores-dont-mean-admission-to-top-universities/
  33. the continued use of the controversial SAT and ACT as an admission requirement

    The SAT has been used for, what, 60 years? Now it’s controversial??

  34. Anon[104] • Disclaimer says:

    The Los Angeles Times article is really quite good.

    The report is fascinating. They allow the social justice retard professors to include their theories and hobby horses in the middle of the report, apparently without copyediting to remove the smell of “retard,” then ignore that stuff in the report’s conclusions. At the end is a really great Q and A that reads like actual questions from parents. Did they solicit public comments?

  35. It looks like the highest GPA at graduation is earned by whites with SAT scores over 1450 and GPAs of 4.25 or higher. They appear to do slightly better than Asians with similar credentials. Or maybe they take easier classes?

    That’s why college GPA is such a terrible metric to use. About 20 years ago Valen Johnson worked hard (but failed) to have an alternative measure used at Duke.
    An alternative to traditional GPA for evaluating student performance
    https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1030037959

    Abstract:

    In response to the growing problem of grade inflation in American undergraduate institutions, alternatives to GPA and GPA-based student assessment are discussed. One alternative summary, based on a Bayesian latent trait formulation, eliminates many of the inequities associated with GPA-based measures and has been proposed as a replacement for GPA-based class ranks at Duke University.

    He also wrote a 2003 book on grade inflation reviewed here: https://www.math.lsu.edu/~mcgehee/Grading.html

    His approach actually made it to a faculty vote at Duke, but was narrowly defeated (also note that he is no longer at Duke, coincidence?). This article talks about that and gives some history as well as mentioning other people working in this area:
    https://www.1843magazine.com/ideas/the-daily/the-extraordinary-silliness-of-american-college-grading

    A simpler GPA adjustment approach: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/07/01/new-approach-grade-inflation

    P.S. I wonder what would happen to the SAT and HS GPA correlations if an adjusted college GPA was used instead. My bet is the relative SAT advantage would increase, but by how much?

    • Replies: @Hodag
    Steve Hsu had a psychometrician on his podcast about a month back. There was an effort a decade or two for a post Bachelor's graduation test to certify if you learned anything in college. The only thing with predictive power on the test was IQ. Some majors are just more G-loaded than others.
  36. There are a few things of note with the linked report.

    Steve clipped Table 3A-1 from page 21 (PDF page 24) of the linked report, “HSGPA compared to SAT as a predictor of UC freshman grades across demographic groups, 2010-2012.” He then interpreted the table’s top line, writing,

    > The SAT explains 21% of the variance in freshman grades at U of California campuses, compared to only 16% for high school grade point averages.

    But looking at the following Figure 3A-1 and the tight quartile boxes in the “Freshman GPA” and “Graduation GPA” graphs, “21%” and “16%” seem way too low.

    For context, scroll down to the graphs accompanying “Scatterplots with correlations of a) +1.00; b) –0.50; c) +0.85; and d) +0.15,” at this ‘Statistics for Dummies’ page. Image reproduced below… maybe… :

    [Edit: picture doesn’t show up inline. Here is the link — https://tinyurl.com/u7qxafm ]

    I’m far from a stats whiz, but I think the issue is that the Table presents R-squared values, whereas “variation” is R. If so, the correct interpretation is:

    “The SAT explains 46% of the variance in freshman grades at U of California campuses, compared to only 40% for high school grade point averages.”

    However, the more important question is to what extent SAT and GPA are “orthogonal” or uncorrelated to each other. In other words, does SAT+GPA predict significantly better than either SAT alone or GPA alone? The answer, on page 23 of the report, is “Yes, to an extent.” Put the two together, and the equivalent variation (R) is 51%.

    • Replies: @res

    I’m far from a stats whiz, but I think the issue is that the Table presents R-squared values, whereas “variation” is R.
     
    Steve has it right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_determination

    "In statistics, the coefficient of determination, denoted R^2 or r^2 and pronounced "R squared", is the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable that is predictable from the independent variable(s)."

    The correlation is r.

    However, the more important question is to what extent SAT and GPA are “orthogonal” or uncorrelated to each other. In other words, does SAT+GPA predict significantly better than either SAT alone or GPA alone? The answer, on page 23 of the report, is “Yes, to an extent.” Put the two together, and the equivalent variation (R) is 51%.
     
    The relevant R^2 numbers (predicting UC freshman grades) are:
    HSGPA 0.16
    SAT 0.21
    HSGPA + SAT 0.26

    So adding HSGPA to SAT improves variance explained about 5% which is the same as the difference between SAT alone and HSGPA alone. Based on those numbers you clearly want both pieces of data.

    And again, freshman grades aren't a great metric given how much variability there is in course difficulty and grading. I think the SAT would look even better as a predictor using a metric which incorporated course difficulty.

    Steve Hsu has some informative posts on SAT scores and physics grades. For example:
    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/05/psychometric-thresholds-for-physics-and.html

    There is clearly something different about the physics and math GPA vs SAT distributions compared to all of the other majors we looked at (see figure 1 in the paper). In the other majors (history, sociology, etc.) it appears that hard work can compensate for low SAT score. But that is not the case in math and physics.
     
  37. @Rosie
    Yes, that is tremendously important. A working-class kid who didn't grow up in a house that values learning may get a spectacular SAT score to level the playing field.

    Agreed. And those kids might be even more impressive than the score indicates if they are motivated and encouraged to learn (e.g. they probably haven’t heavily test prepped and are unlikely to have grown up in a house full of books). I think the SAT recentering in 1995 hurt this group by making it less possible to achieve a “spectacular SAT score” given the lower ceiling. Lots (relative to ~10 per year pre-recentering) of people score 1600 these days.

    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/02/perfect-act-sat-scores-dont-mean-admission-to-top-universities/

  38. @ic1000
    There are a few things of note with the linked report.

    Steve clipped Table 3A-1 from page 21 (PDF page 24) of the linked report, "HSGPA compared to SAT as a predictor of UC freshman grades across demographic groups, 2010-2012." He then interpreted the table's top line, writing,

    > The SAT explains 21% of the variance in freshman grades at U of California campuses, compared to only 16% for high school grade point averages.

    But looking at the following Figure 3A-1 and the tight quartile boxes in the "Freshman GPA" and "Graduation GPA" graphs, "21%" and "16%" seem way too low.

    For context, scroll down to the graphs accompanying "Scatterplots with correlations of a) +1.00; b) –0.50; c) +0.85; and d) +0.15," at this 'Statistics for Dummies' page. Image reproduced below... maybe... :

    [Edit: picture doesn't show up inline. Here is the link -- https://tinyurl.com/u7qxafm ]

    I'm far from a stats whiz, but I think the issue is that the Table presents R-squared values, whereas "variation" is R. If so, the correct interpretation is:

    "The SAT explains 46% of the variance in freshman grades at U of California campuses, compared to only 40% for high school grade point averages."

    However, the more important question is to what extent SAT and GPA are "orthogonal" or uncorrelated to each other. In other words, does SAT+GPA predict significantly better than either SAT alone or GPA alone? The answer, on page 23 of the report, is "Yes, to an extent." Put the two together, and the equivalent variation (R) is 51%.

    I’m far from a stats whiz, but I think the issue is that the Table presents R-squared values, whereas “variation” is R.

    Steve has it right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_determination

    “In statistics, the coefficient of determination, denoted R^2 or r^2 and pronounced “R squared”, is the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable that is predictable from the independent variable(s).”

    The correlation is r.

    However, the more important question is to what extent SAT and GPA are “orthogonal” or uncorrelated to each other. In other words, does SAT+GPA predict significantly better than either SAT alone or GPA alone? The answer, on page 23 of the report, is “Yes, to an extent.” Put the two together, and the equivalent variation (R) is 51%.

    The relevant R^2 numbers (predicting UC freshman grades) are:
    HSGPA 0.16
    SAT 0.21
    HSGPA + SAT 0.26

    So adding HSGPA to SAT improves variance explained about 5% which is the same as the difference between SAT alone and HSGPA alone. Based on those numbers you clearly want both pieces of data.

    And again, freshman grades aren’t a great metric given how much variability there is in course difficulty and grading. I think the SAT would look even better as a predictor using a metric which incorporated course difficulty.

    Steve Hsu has some informative posts on SAT scores and physics grades. For example:
    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/05/psychometric-thresholds-for-physics-and.html

    There is clearly something different about the physics and math GPA vs SAT distributions compared to all of the other majors we looked at (see figure 1 in the paper). In the other majors (history, sociology, etc.) it appears that hard work can compensate for low SAT score. But that is not the case in math and physics.

    • Thanks: ic1000
    • Replies: @jon

    And again, freshman grades aren’t a great metric given how much variability there is in course difficulty and grading.
     
    In law schools, all first year students take the exact same courses. Are there any good studies of the correlation between the LSAT and 1L grades? If so, these would be a lot better indication of the true predictive value of standardized tests versus grades.
  39. Don’t you love how the data shows Asians and Whites scoring above 1450 on the SAT, but there aren’t any Hispanics or black in those brackets? Heck, there are zero blacks even in the 1301+ bracket, where there are at least a small cluster of Hispanics.

  40. The report also found that test scores are a better predictor of college performance than high school grades but that UC weighs grades more heavily in admission decisions.

    SAT scores usually fall within a range, no matter how many times someone takes it.
    The amount of grade inflation that goes on in our schools is astounding. Even in good suburban schools, you can get a C in the final and still end up with an A grade as long as you turn in all your homework dutifully. I’m sure it’s even worse in low income schools.

    • Replies: @Joe Schmoe

    Even in good suburban schools, you can get a C in the final and still end up with an A grade as long as you turn in all your homework dutifully.
     
    yup

    I remember a high school class where people failed the final but still got A's in the class. I begged the teacher to give me two full points on my final average so I could get a B in the class. I got a B on the final exam, but I was the only person who passed the final. And that was in the 80's.

    Oh yeah, it's worse now.
  41. One dog that doesn’t bark is the near-absence of mentions of the Cal State system in the report. Steve has pointed out before that California has two state-university systems, “University of California at…” and the California State University, with its 23 campuses (Wikipedia).

    The report’s authors consider the UC system as a whole rather than campus by campus (with a couple of exceptions, e.g. Tables 3B-2, -3, and -4). What would California’s state-supported higher education system look like, if subjected to these analytical metrics as a whole? Quite different, in all likelihood.

    The one substantive discussion of the Cal State system that I could find is a long paragraph that begins at the bottom of page 70, reproduced below the fold. Here’s the tl;dr version of what the authors assert (italics in original) —

    Controlling for prior grades and test scores, students who go to more selective colleges and universities complete degrees at much higher rates than those who attend less selective institutions… The average graduation rate at the typical CSU is 25-30% lower than at UC…

    [Quoting Bleemer, 2018] — “URM [Under-represented minority] students and students from the bottom SAT quartile of high schools obtain even larger 30 percentage point increases in graduation rates, providing evidence against ability ”mismatch” that could diminish educational attainment as a result of attending a more competitive university.” [End quote]

    In other words, these students, on average, defied the prediction that they would not do well in the competitive UC environment. There is abundant evidence that attending a more selective institution boosts graduation rates significantly above those at less selective institutions for similarly prepared students

    Re: mismatch, who are you gonna believe, me or your lyin’ eyes?

    [MORE]

    Text of the entire paragraph:

    Prediction of likelihood of success at UC in the absence of robust support for students who are eligible but somewhat less prepared, raises other questions. Given the enormous inequalities in education in the state of California (discussed further below), what is the responsibility of UC to help ameliorate these unjust conditions? What is the responsibility of UC to help interrupt the vast inequalities that exist – that is, to prevent the predicted poor outcome? To continue with such major discrepancies in access is to be complicit in the perpetuation of inequality. Some argue that the California Master Plan for Higher Education accounts for this problem by offering admission to the California State University system or the community colleges. Who has access to UC matters greatly in the lives of students and their communities. A college degree provides significant social mobility and a host of other benefits, including better health and marital stability [ref. 84]. The average baccalaureate degree holder in 2015 earned 67% more than the individual with only a high school diploma [ref. 85]. UC graduates also earn more than their peers who attended less selective colleges once they are in the labor market [ref. 86]. But the likelihood of actually completing a degree differs greatly by the selectivity of the college/university one attends. Controlling for prior grades and test scores, students who go to more selective colleges and universities complete degrees at much higher rates than those who attend less selective institutions [ref. 87]. For example, in 2018, the CSU system posted an all-time high 61% six-year graduation rate across all campuses, but there was large variation among campuses, with several campuses in the 42-48% range [ref. 88]. The average graduation rate at the typical CSU is 25-30% lower than at UC (Bleemer, 2018). Moreover, Bleemer studied the effect of ELC enrollment at four UC campuses on graduation rates for URM students in the lowest quartile of test scores versus their peers who attended less selective schools and found

    URM students and students from the bottom SAT quartile of high schools obtain even larger 30 percentage point increases in graduation rates, providing evidence against ability ”mismatch” that could diminish educational attainment (in terms of degree receipt) as a result of attending a more competitive university [ref. 89]

    In other words, these students, on average, defied the prediction that they would not do well in the competitive UC environment. There is abundant evidence that attending a more selective institution boosts graduation rates significantly above those at less selective institutions for similarly prepared students and this serves to interrupt historic inequities in access to degree attainment for URMs. And there are other advantages to attending a UC campus. UC graduates are more likely to attend graduate school and gain further credentials than students from less selective institutions, and as a result they are more likely to achieve leadership positions, which is of critical value to their communities.

  42. @TelfoedJohn

    The SAT (or, presumably, ACT) are better than GPA at distinguishing promising applicants among most groups other than whites and the affluent, where the GPA is better.
     
    Would IQ be a better predictor than SAT or GPA?

    Nah, too generalized a measure

    However, if we could quantify and perfectly identify the g factor… That could do it

  43. In past posts, Steve has often written about the doctrine of disparate impact. The EEOC and the courts have based action on the idea that inequality of outcome is powerful evidence of illegal or immoral discrimination against certain groups, whether explicit or implicit.

    The assumptions that underpin this doctrine form the basis of this Task Force’s thinking. Disparities along lines of race and class are seen when comparing the racial composition of California’s high school seniors to UC admittees — they cannot be due to differences in ability or to differences in disciplined effort. All California high school seniors are equal, or at least the major racial groups of seniors are equal to one another. Therefore, the racial composition of UC’s in-state freshman students must be the same as that of the pool of high school seniors.

    The Task Force sees only two explanations for the observed disparate impact: “75% of the opportunity gap [sic] arises from factors rooted in systemic racial and class inequalities that precede admission.” “25% of underrepresentation was due to UC admissions decisions overall. Test scores play a role in those decisions… even if they are not the primary barrier to admission.”

    “[Some of the Task Force] members contended that the University has an obligation to interrupt perpetuation of inequality, especially when the state played a historic role in creating it, and must do more to serve the state’s aspiring college students more equitably.”

    Quotes are from three paragraphs of the Executive Summary, starting at the bottom of page 4. Complete text is below the fold.

    [MORE]

    The Task Force examined the pipeline for high school seniors for the class of 2018 to the admitted pool of freshmen that year. There was a 22-percentage point gap between the share of URMs [under-represented minorities] in the grade 12 class. The Task Force concluded that multiple factors contribute to this underrepresentation at UC. Roughly 75% of the opportunity gap arises from factors rooted in systemic racial and class inequalities that precede admission: lower high school graduation rates for URMs, lower rates of completion of the A-G courses required by UC and CSU, and lower application rates. The most significant contributor was lack of eligibility as a result of failure to complete all required A-G courses with a C or better. Roughly 25% of underrepresentation was due to UC admissions decisions overall. Test scores play a role in those decisions, and thus account for some of that 25%, even if they are not the primary barrier to admission. It is also unknown to what extent low scores on the standardized tests deter some students from even submitting applications.

    In sum, mean differences in standardized test scores between different demographic groups are often very large, and many of the ways these tests could be used in admissions would certainly produce strong disparate impacts between groups. However, UC weights test scores less strongly than GPA, and comprehensive review appears to help compensate for group differences in test scores. The distributions of test scores among applicants are very different by group, but the distributions of test scores among admitted students are also very different by group, and in almost exactly the identical way. The Task Force did not find evidence that UC’s use of test scores played a major role in worsening the effects of disparities already present among applicants and did find evidence that UC’s admissions process helped to make up for the potential adverse effect of score differences between groups.

    Yet this is not to conclude that consideration of test scores does not adversely affect URM applicants. If standardized test scores must be compensated in order to achieve the entering class sought by UC, that is reason to question whether it is necessary to use the tests at all, and/or whether it is possible to design an alternative instrument that does not require such compensation. UC admissions practices do not fully make up for disparities that persist along lines of race and class. Whether these disparities arise from test scores, GPA, or others among the 14 factors that comprise comprehensive review at UC, the outcome of UC admissions processes is that many of the populations historically excluded from opportunity are still underrepresented by wide margins. Some members of the Task Force emphasized UC’s responsibility to assist disadvantaged and URM students who attend schools with lesser resources than those attended by students from affluent families, and they worried that continuing to use tests would help preserve the status quo. These members contended that the University has an obligation to interrupt perpetuation of inequality, especially when the state played a historic role in creating it, and must do more to serve the state’s aspiring college students more equitably.

  44. @International Jew
    Getting good grades is, in part, a game: strategic choice of courses, willingness to cheat, persistent post-exam pestering of professors. It stands to reason then that whoever excelled at this game in high school, will keep it up in college.

    I've had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.

    Smarter people are better at doing all of those things you mention.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    And more-honest people are worse. Intelligence isn't everything that we want in a person.
  45. @International Jew

    higher admission rates for less-advantaged applicants for any given test score, a finding that faculty review committee members said surprised them.
     
    Shows how out of touch they are.

    It’s called “holistic” admissions…

  46. @Desiderius
    Ask not for whom regression to the mean comes.

    It comes for thee.

    Ask not for whom regression to the mean comes.

    It comes for thee.

    Marry well.

    • Replies: @JMcG
    Amen brother, amen. My kids are tired of my speech on the importance of choosing a mate, but hopefully it sticks.
  47. Another barrier to UC admission for home-grown students is the large number of foreign nationals attending UC schools. A few years ago, there was a protest at UC San Diego because they invited the Dalai Lama as the commencement speaker. The protestors? Chinese students who made up about a sixth of the student body. Nonresident students constitute about 13% of UC’s total undergraduate student body, many from China.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Agreed! And those Chinese students were pretty aggressive... on what is a foreign soil for them. Time to eject those guests back home.
  48. @TelfoedJohn

    The SAT (or, presumably, ACT) are better than GPA at distinguishing promising applicants among most groups other than whites and the affluent, where the GPA is better.
     
    Would IQ be a better predictor than SAT or GPA?

    Would IQ be a better predictor than SAT or GPA?

    I seem to recall IQ and SAT scores being fairly well correlated. I recall back in the day Steve estimated Gore & GWB’s SAT scores using their military entrance exam scores, converting to IQ along the way. Or maybe I added a step that wasn’t there.

  49. @Anon
    I don't think that the UC system uses grade point average in the way you're implying. They don't offer admission to all applicants by grade point average, nor by school-adjusted grade point average. They offer admission to the top 9 percent by grade point average of each high school in California. This trick was developed by Texas state universities, and has spread like wildfire.

    You get a lot of boneheads from ghetto high schools who drop out immediately. UC originally used 5 percent, like Texas, then upped it to 10 percent, and now use 9 percent, which seems to be the sweet spot. Of course, blacks in the 10 to 20 percent range at good high schools are smarter than those in the top 9 percent at bad high schools, but that wouldn't be a "race neutral" policy.

    In Texas, state law mandates the top 10% but schools may choose to be more selective. UT Austin now only guarantees admission to the top 6% and word is, it will likely narrow further to the top 4% in the next decade

    None of that guarantees admission to the highly selective computer science, engineering or business programs. Just to the school of liberal arts by the way.

  50. @Anon
    I don't think that the UC system uses grade point average in the way you're implying. They don't offer admission to all applicants by grade point average, nor by school-adjusted grade point average. They offer admission to the top 9 percent by grade point average of each high school in California. This trick was developed by Texas state universities, and has spread like wildfire.

    You get a lot of boneheads from ghetto high schools who drop out immediately. UC originally used 5 percent, like Texas, then upped it to 10 percent, and now use 9 percent, which seems to be the sweet spot. Of course, blacks in the 10 to 20 percent range at good high schools are smarter than those in the top 9 percent at bad high schools, but that wouldn't be a "race neutral" policy.

    Steve usually hones in on the statistical oddities and anomalies in these reports, but I think he may have missed one here. Take a look at the last chart for “non-graduation rate” of whites as a function of SAT score.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student’s SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Of course, if these results applied to black students there would be a great hue and cry about how systemic bias and a “hostile” environment are forcing out qualified PoC. So maybe these results are evidence of academia’s current hostility to Whites (it would be interesting to see a breakdown by sex as well).

    On the other hand, maybe higher IQ Whites are smart enough to figure out that a college degree isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, and are dropping out (a la Gates and Zuckerberg), for greener pastures in self-employment or the trades. Who knows.

    But since it doesn’t fit the “unfair to marginalized people” narrative, you can bet that no one will be curious enough to figure it out.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    One more thing . . .

    Look at the charts showing the correlation between SAT scores and college GPA for Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. They show that (holding high school GPA constant), Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.

    As I recall, this "over prediction" phenomenon has been around forever. It supposedly stems from the "regression toward the mean" that results because the highest scoring individuals in a a low scoring group tend to be at the far right tail of the probability distribution.

    But the bottom line is that Blacks and Latinos do not perform better than their SAT scores indicate -- in fact, quite the opposite. The SAT is only biased "against" them in the sense that it isn't as biased in their favor as some alternative metric that could be cooked up.

    (Note: The Asian scores also show this "over-prediction" effect of SAT scores on college GPA, but I'd be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses. Others might attribute this to their SAT scores being inflate by obsessive test prep. But that doesn't ring true to me as I don't think these tests can really be gamed all that much as they're mostly dressed up IQ tests).)

    , @Desiderius
    It’s very much both. And you’re right the effect size is akin to that of the opioid epidemic on our non-college peers. Only midwits seem immune as they take their designated place as Washington Generals elites (sic). The other thing I’ve seen is when AWFLs want to cut into the Affirmative Action line they’ll choose the most capable white males as their victims since they reason that such men have plenty of other opportunities.

    Under 40 white men don’t need to be told about any of this - they’ve lived it.

    Over 40s would do well to take heed.

    , @ben tillman

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea.
     
    Perhaps it's a really small sample.
    , @Lockean Proviso

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student’s SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.
     

    Actually, Asians with 3.25-3.5 GPAs also exhibit a similar dropoff in graduation rates at higher SAT scores, and have a pretty flat or very slightly negative correlation at 3-3.25 and 3.5-3.75.

    I believe the explanation for this phenomenon is that these are classic bright underachievers. Given today's high school grade inflation, a 3.0-3.5 GPA is quite low, particularly for students this bright. Whether due to lack of motivation, organization, social skills, or study skills, or perhaps institutional failure to engage their interest, they don't do well at school. I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't white and Asian kids who also have similar SATs with even lower GPAs, maybe put off by the political bs and message that they aren't of interest amid all the jocks, popular kids with sociable parents, and URMs who matter more to The System.

    So these 3.0+ kids may manage to get into Berkeley on the strength of their high SAT scores and probably also some strong recommendations from teachers whose classes or subjects that they managed to shine in or really creative projects, but once there they don't have the conscientiousness or grit to get through to graduation. Probably most of them are male.

    I should know because I was such a student. My high school grades were mediocre but I had the highest SATs in my class at a suburban public school. I went off to a selective college that gambled on me and managed to get kicked out for drugs by sophomore year while already on academic probation. I still wonder how it would have gone if I had joined the Navy for the Nuclear Power program that I was recruited for based on my 99th %tile ASVABs. Maybe I would've screwed that up too, or maybe the structure would have been a good thing for me.

    At any rate, I ended up working several blue collar jobs for years while taking college classes on and off, got a tech degree from a community college, worked in biotech for awhile, then met a very brainy woman who helped me get my life even more on track so that I earned a 4.0 in classes at the local state university, took subject SATs with high scores, and applied to the Univerisity of Oxford and got an unconditional offer after a structured academic interview. I graduated from Oxford in my 30s, married her, and had a daughter. So, happy ending and I am grateful.

  51. @Erik L
    I wonder if any parents have been brave enough to send their average kid to a terrible school in order to get into Berkeley or UCLA.

    I’ve heard that a few years ago a White kid finished #1 at a crappy public high school (aren’t they all?), vast majority Black, in Oakland.

    The kid went on to Stanfürd.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    At some "all black" schools they only realize that they had a Vietnamese kid in their class when he is announced as the valedictorian.

    I also wonder if it has occurred to anyone that integration and "diversity" naturally reduces the probability of PoC students finishing in the top 9% of their class and thus getting admitted to U.C.

  52. @res

    I’m far from a stats whiz, but I think the issue is that the Table presents R-squared values, whereas “variation” is R.
     
    Steve has it right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_determination

    "In statistics, the coefficient of determination, denoted R^2 or r^2 and pronounced "R squared", is the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable that is predictable from the independent variable(s)."

    The correlation is r.

    However, the more important question is to what extent SAT and GPA are “orthogonal” or uncorrelated to each other. In other words, does SAT+GPA predict significantly better than either SAT alone or GPA alone? The answer, on page 23 of the report, is “Yes, to an extent.” Put the two together, and the equivalent variation (R) is 51%.
     
    The relevant R^2 numbers (predicting UC freshman grades) are:
    HSGPA 0.16
    SAT 0.21
    HSGPA + SAT 0.26

    So adding HSGPA to SAT improves variance explained about 5% which is the same as the difference between SAT alone and HSGPA alone. Based on those numbers you clearly want both pieces of data.

    And again, freshman grades aren't a great metric given how much variability there is in course difficulty and grading. I think the SAT would look even better as a predictor using a metric which incorporated course difficulty.

    Steve Hsu has some informative posts on SAT scores and physics grades. For example:
    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/05/psychometric-thresholds-for-physics-and.html

    There is clearly something different about the physics and math GPA vs SAT distributions compared to all of the other majors we looked at (see figure 1 in the paper). In the other majors (history, sociology, etc.) it appears that hard work can compensate for low SAT score. But that is not the case in math and physics.
     

    And again, freshman grades aren’t a great metric given how much variability there is in course difficulty and grading.

    In law schools, all first year students take the exact same courses. Are there any good studies of the correlation between the LSAT and 1L grades? If so, these would be a lot better indication of the true predictive value of standardized tests versus grades.

    • Replies: @res
    Good idea. This paper looks at that (but not the primary focus) and quotes results from other studies. The numbers are in line with the article Steve discussed. The excerpt is from page 21.
    https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1651&context=articles

    Not surprising, our results predicting 1L GPA, found in Table 6 column 1a, are typical of other results found by the LSAC in their analysis of the usefulness of LSAT as a predictor of 1L GPA. In a series of regressions using data from 152 unnamed schools over 2011 and 2012, LSAC estimated first year GPA from a combination of LSAT and UGPA. 70 The LSAC study shows that our two schools are “typical” in that the correlation coefficients between first year grades and the LSAT, UGPA, and a combination of LSAT and UGPA, respectively, in our study, are nearly identical to the LSAC study averages. The LSAC study reported these median correlations: First Year Average (“FYA”) (a variable equivalent to our 1L GPA) and LSAT (r=0.35), FYA and UGPA (r=0.29), and LSAT and UGPA combined (r=0.47). Comparable to the LSAC study findings, our study found these median correlations: FYA and LSAT (r=0.37), FYA and UGPA (r=0.28), and LSAT and UGPA combined (r=0.39). Our results track the LSAC results, making our two schools “typical” for comparison purposes.
    As far as 1L GPA is concerned, our correlations and R-square results generally track the LSAC findings. While the correlation coefficient gives us the strength of the linear relationship between the coefficients, squaring the correlation coefficient yields the coefficient of determination (“R-square”), which gives us the variation that can be explained by the linear relationship between the
    two variables. Their highest FYA and LSAT correlation (r=0.54), translates in an R-square of 0.29 while their lowest FYA and LSAT correlation (r=0.16), translates into an R-square of 0.03. The R-square values that we report in our study are not the highest R-square values that the LSAC study reports – but they are also not the lowest. They are closer to the averages that the LSAC study finds,
    making our schools ‘typical’. 71

     

    One possible issue with all of these correlations is restriction of range. Students tend to sort into schools by ability. The test correlations would probably be higher if we were somehow able to look at all college students taking an identical program.
  53. It’s a little shocking how little predictive power a Black student’s HS GPA has on predicting their College GPA. Lowest predictor of the group.
    But their SAT scores are pretty standard for predictive power. I’m sure that means something about the predictive power of grades for the Blacks compared to SAT, but how many would listening?

  54. @Hypnotoad666
    Steve usually hones in on the statistical oddities and anomalies in these reports, but I think he may have missed one here. Take a look at the last chart for "non-graduation rate" of whites as a function of SAT score.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student's SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Of course, if these results applied to black students there would be a great hue and cry about how systemic bias and a "hostile" environment are forcing out qualified PoC. So maybe these results are evidence of academia's current hostility to Whites (it would be interesting to see a breakdown by sex as well).

    On the other hand, maybe higher IQ Whites are smart enough to figure out that a college degree isn't all it's cracked up to be, and are dropping out (a la Gates and Zuckerberg), for greener pastures in self-employment or the trades. Who knows.

    But since it doesn't fit the "unfair to marginalized people" narrative, you can bet that no one will be curious enough to figure it out.

    One more thing . . .

    Look at the charts showing the correlation between SAT scores and college GPA for Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. They show that (holding high school GPA constant), Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.

    As I recall, this “over prediction” phenomenon has been around forever. It supposedly stems from the “regression toward the mean” that results because the highest scoring individuals in a a low scoring group tend to be at the far right tail of the probability distribution.

    But the bottom line is that Blacks and Latinos do not perform better than their SAT scores indicate — in fact, quite the opposite. The SAT is only biased “against” them in the sense that it isn’t as biased in their favor as some alternative metric that could be cooked up.

    (Note: The Asian scores also show this “over-prediction” effect of SAT scores on college GPA, but I’d be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses. Others might attribute this to their SAT scores being inflate by obsessive test prep. But that doesn’t ring true to me as I don’t think these tests can really be gamed all that much as they’re mostly dressed up IQ tests).)

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.
     
    Back when I tried to reason with “Education Realist,” this was one of the things she claimed - that blacks over-performed their SAT scores in classrooms. I saw an earlier version of this data and told her she actually had it backward. Of course, she simply ignored it and moved on, after spewing a lot of ad hominem my way.

    I’d be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses.
     
    It’d be great if someone would isolate this variable and only looked at STEM grades by race. It’s silly to compare GPAs of those taking physics and high-level theoretical math with those studying “communication,” sociology, or worse, Africana studies.
    , @ben tillman

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.
     
    La Griffe du Lion covered this way back when. It's a multiple choice test. You could get a perfect score by guessing even if you didn't read the questions. The less knowledgeable someone is, the more likely his correct answers will be due to luck.
    , @Spangel
    My guess is that despite the uc systems ostensible lack of affirmative action, blacks and Latinos get a boost from their race and get into better schools for their sat score.

    Essentially, I bet a 1350 asian is unlikely to get into Berkeley. A 1350 black would be very likely to get in. So the blacks end up with lower gpa since they are at harder schools and at the lower end of the sat range for that school.

  55. @Hypnotoad666
    Steve usually hones in on the statistical oddities and anomalies in these reports, but I think he may have missed one here. Take a look at the last chart for "non-graduation rate" of whites as a function of SAT score.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student's SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Of course, if these results applied to black students there would be a great hue and cry about how systemic bias and a "hostile" environment are forcing out qualified PoC. So maybe these results are evidence of academia's current hostility to Whites (it would be interesting to see a breakdown by sex as well).

    On the other hand, maybe higher IQ Whites are smart enough to figure out that a college degree isn't all it's cracked up to be, and are dropping out (a la Gates and Zuckerberg), for greener pastures in self-employment or the trades. Who knows.

    But since it doesn't fit the "unfair to marginalized people" narrative, you can bet that no one will be curious enough to figure it out.

    It’s very much both. And you’re right the effect size is akin to that of the opioid epidemic on our non-college peers. Only midwits seem immune as they take their designated place as Washington Generals elites (sic). The other thing I’ve seen is when AWFLs want to cut into the Affirmative Action line they’ll choose the most capable white males as their victims since they reason that such men have plenty of other opportunities.

    Under 40 white men don’t need to be told about any of this – they’ve lived it.

    Over 40s would do well to take heed.

  56. @Abolish_public_education
    I’ve heard that a few years ago a White kid finished #1 at a crappy public high school (aren’t they all?), vast majority Black, in Oakland.

    The kid went on to Stanfürd.

    At some “all black” schools they only realize that they had a Vietnamese kid in their class when he is announced as the valedictorian.

    I also wonder if it has occurred to anyone that integration and “diversity” naturally reduces the probability of PoC students finishing in the top 9% of their class and thus getting admitted to U.C.

  57. @Dutch Boy
    Another barrier to UC admission for home-grown students is the large number of foreign nationals attending UC schools. A few years ago, there was a protest at UC San Diego because they invited the Dalai Lama as the commencement speaker. The protestors? Chinese students who made up about a sixth of the student body. Nonresident students constitute about 13% of UC’s total undergraduate student body, many from China.

    Agreed! And those Chinese students were pretty aggressive… on what is a foreign soil for them. Time to eject those guests back home.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
  58. @Hypnotoad666
    One more thing . . .

    Look at the charts showing the correlation between SAT scores and college GPA for Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. They show that (holding high school GPA constant), Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.

    As I recall, this "over prediction" phenomenon has been around forever. It supposedly stems from the "regression toward the mean" that results because the highest scoring individuals in a a low scoring group tend to be at the far right tail of the probability distribution.

    But the bottom line is that Blacks and Latinos do not perform better than their SAT scores indicate -- in fact, quite the opposite. The SAT is only biased "against" them in the sense that it isn't as biased in their favor as some alternative metric that could be cooked up.

    (Note: The Asian scores also show this "over-prediction" effect of SAT scores on college GPA, but I'd be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses. Others might attribute this to their SAT scores being inflate by obsessive test prep. But that doesn't ring true to me as I don't think these tests can really be gamed all that much as they're mostly dressed up IQ tests).)

    Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.

    Back when I tried to reason with “Education Realist,” this was one of the things she claimed – that blacks over-performed their SAT scores in classrooms. I saw an earlier version of this data and told her she actually had it backward. Of course, she simply ignored it and moved on, after spewing a lot of ad hominem my way.

    I’d be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses.

    It’d be great if someone would isolate this variable and only looked at STEM grades by race. It’s silly to compare GPAs of those taking physics and high-level theoretical math with those studying “communication,” sociology, or worse, Africana studies.

    • Replies: @res

    It’d be great if someone would isolate this variable and only looked at STEM grades by race. It’s silly to compare GPAs of those taking physics and high-level theoretical math with those studying “communication,” sociology, or worse, Africana studies.
     
    You might consider asking Steve Hsu about this privately. I suspect they have useful data, but to my knowledge they never published anything about race.
    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/05/psychometric-thresholds-for-physics-and.html
  59. @Mr McKenna

    From the Los Angeles Times:

     

    Meanwhile. Not From the Los Angeles Times:


    https://www.foxnews.com/us/los-angeles-editorial-board-supports-removing-homeless-with-million-dollar-malibu-view

    “DR. DREW PINSKY HITS ADAM SCHIFF ON HOMELESS CRISIS IN HIS OWN DISTRICT: ‘HE’S ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL’ ”

    Too busy trying to protect the Ukraine. LoL.

  60. @AnonAnon

    It looks like the highest GPA at graduation is earned by whites with SAT scores over 1450 and GPAs of 4.25 or higher. They appear to do slightly better than Asians with similar credentials. Or maybe they take easier classes?
     
    Or, maybe the few top white kids [grudgingly] admitted into the UCs have to be the best of the best to get in while many of the top Asian kids who are admitted are, when push comes to shove, not quite as impressive. I.e., the test prep and tutoring distorts actual performance and it’s revealed in the college GPAs. What a race traitor you are sometimes, Steve.

    Whites are quite the [discriminated against] minority at the UCs these days so the ones that get in are really top notch. The ones I know of that got into UCLA and Cal from our high school not only had 4.7+ GPAs with a dozen+ of the toughest APs on their transcripts but were also four year varsity athletes, which is an enormous time commitment. From what I’ve observed, the Asian kids that get into the UCs tend to focus their extracurriculars in other areas such as clubs and volunteering so perhaps don’t master time management as well.

    Additionally, I’d guess the test scores of the white kids were more organic and not as inflated by massive test prep as the Asian kids. I’d also guess the white kids were more independent when it came to mastering the material for their AP classes versus taking the class through a test prep place the summer before and using “study groups” (coughcheatingcirclescough) to prep enough to do well on the tests but not truly absorb the material.

    Lastly, maybe Asian kids don’t do as well at college compared to high school because Tiger Mom isn’t there to ride their ass 24/7.

    Anecdotally, in quite the stereotype swap, my son’s freshman year Asian roommates were a partier who liked to get drunk and high and a kid who didn’t come back after first quarter, while the white boys were the studious grind engineering students.

    The ones I know of that got into UCLA and Cal from our high school not only had 4.7+ GPAs

    Oh for fuck’s sake… so now GPA doesn’t stop at 4 in the sub-standard Yanklish system?

    Fucking Yanks – they have to debauch every grading system so that their retarded snowflake kiddies don’t have aneurysms and need yet another psychotropic.

    Eventually everyone will be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics and the Fields Medal on the day they’re born – and by then US PIAAC scores will be akin to what you would get if you sampled from a population of 300 million mongoloids.

    I’ve always been moderately proud of being a ‘4.0’ guy; pre-credentialism you got that by being in the top 3 or 4 students in your graduating class, based on standardised examinations – the final exam (85% weight) being 3 or 4 hours per subject, administered over the entire (state-wide) final-year-of-high-school population, none of which included “pick-a-box” (multiple-choice).

    The highest high school grade was ‘A’, and was awarded to about the top 5% of a class. In a matriculating class of 300 there might be 1 student who got all ‘A’s (I didn’t: I got a ‘B’ for Chemistry). Any kid who got 4 or 5 ‘A’s was exceptional (it was good enough to get into Medicine or Law).

    .

    Now we have had to follow the Yanks and Poms into the mire, and upwards of 20% of the final year high school class gets more than 1 ‘A’, and what used to be year 11 Pure Maths is now final year “Advanced Placement” Mathematics (FFS) and half the exam is multiple choice (FFS), with no requirement no ‘show your working‘ on long-form questions (FFS).

    .

    Likewise at University level – in my jurisdiction in my graduating year, if you got straight ‘High Distinctions’ in 4th year (the Honours year) you were guaranteed to graduate with a ‘First‘ (summa cum laude in the US taxonomy)… and your GPA was 4.0 – the maximum possible.

    If none of the top 3 or 4 students got straight HD’s, they would still graduate with a First – which seems fair since that would put them in the top 0.6% of the faculty’s graduates, and entry cutoffs were high enough that you had to be in the top 5% of high school graduates to get in. A First guaranteed a scholarship for Masters and PhD, and fee waivers and a TA gig.

    My alma mater – Monash U – is ranked #32 globally in my discipline (Economics/Econometrics), above UCLA.

    Monash Econ gets shit marks on citation and citation-impact scores nowadays, because a key research engine-room – the Centre of Policy Studies (an economic forecasting think tank I was part of in the 90s) – left for a different university as people became more pissed off with the drop in standards that is inexorable if the administrative leadership decides size is more important than quality.

    Overall, it’s ranked #59 globally now – well below UCLA (#14), and reasonably respectable globally – but it’s fallen roughly a spot a year for the last 20 years.

    The reason for the fall is typical of US-led managerialism-in-education: in the late 1990s its then Vice Chancellor tried to turn Monash into a UC-style model (i.e., several campuses, most of which are shit) instead of trying to continue to be a high-quality single-campus university. Turns out there’s much more money to be made by pretending to educate retards.

    /OKBoomer

    • Agree: black sea
  61. @jon

    And again, freshman grades aren’t a great metric given how much variability there is in course difficulty and grading.
     
    In law schools, all first year students take the exact same courses. Are there any good studies of the correlation between the LSAT and 1L grades? If so, these would be a lot better indication of the true predictive value of standardized tests versus grades.

    Good idea. This paper looks at that (but not the primary focus) and quotes results from other studies. The numbers are in line with the article Steve discussed. The excerpt is from page 21.
    https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1651&context=articles

    Not surprising, our results predicting 1L GPA, found in Table 6 column 1a, are typical of other results found by the LSAC in their analysis of the usefulness of LSAT as a predictor of 1L GPA. In a series of regressions using data from 152 unnamed schools over 2011 and 2012, LSAC estimated first year GPA from a combination of LSAT and UGPA. 70 The LSAC study shows that our two schools are “typical” in that the correlation coefficients between first year grades and the LSAT, UGPA, and a combination of LSAT and UGPA, respectively, in our study, are nearly identical to the LSAC study averages. The LSAC study reported these median correlations: First Year Average (“FYA”) (a variable equivalent to our 1L GPA) and LSAT (r=0.35), FYA and UGPA (r=0.29), and LSAT and UGPA combined (r=0.47). Comparable to the LSAC study findings, our study found these median correlations: FYA and LSAT (r=0.37), FYA and UGPA (r=0.28), and LSAT and UGPA combined (r=0.39). Our results track the LSAC results, making our two schools “typical” for comparison purposes.
    As far as 1L GPA is concerned, our correlations and R-square results generally track the LSAC findings. While the correlation coefficient gives us the strength of the linear relationship between the coefficients, squaring the correlation coefficient yields the coefficient of determination (“R-square”), which gives us the variation that can be explained by the linear relationship between the
    two variables. Their highest FYA and LSAT correlation (r=0.54), translates in an R-square of 0.29 while their lowest FYA and LSAT correlation (r=0.16), translates into an R-square of 0.03. The R-square values that we report in our study are not the highest R-square values that the LSAC study reports – but they are also not the lowest. They are closer to the averages that the LSAC study finds,
    making our schools ‘typical’. 71

    One possible issue with all of these correlations is restriction of range. Students tend to sort into schools by ability. The test correlations would probably be higher if we were somehow able to look at all college students taking an identical program.

    • Agree: Twinkie
  62. @Twinkie

    Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.
     
    Back when I tried to reason with “Education Realist,” this was one of the things she claimed - that blacks over-performed their SAT scores in classrooms. I saw an earlier version of this data and told her she actually had it backward. Of course, she simply ignored it and moved on, after spewing a lot of ad hominem my way.

    I’d be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses.
     
    It’d be great if someone would isolate this variable and only looked at STEM grades by race. It’s silly to compare GPAs of those taking physics and high-level theoretical math with those studying “communication,” sociology, or worse, Africana studies.

    It’d be great if someone would isolate this variable and only looked at STEM grades by race. It’s silly to compare GPAs of those taking physics and high-level theoretical math with those studying “communication,” sociology, or worse, Africana studies.

    You might consider asking Steve Hsu about this privately. I suspect they have useful data, but to my knowledge they never published anything about race.
    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/05/psychometric-thresholds-for-physics-and.html

  63. @Twinkie

    Ask not for whom regression to the mean comes.

    It comes for thee.
     
    Marry well.

    Amen brother, amen. My kids are tired of my speech on the importance of choosing a mate, but hopefully it sticks.

  64. @Erik L
    I wonder if any parents have been brave enough to send their average kid to a terrible school in order to get into Berkeley or UCLA.

    That’s what I did to get into Cal Berkeley. I went to a really crappy community college (ranked 103 out of 106 in California at the time and in one of the poorest zip codes in the US). I had a pretty high GPA with no standardized tests. Berkeley grades on a strict curve (unlike Harvard which has rampant grade inflation). This means that while it’s possible to get in, those kids who fall into the left side of the Bell curve in grades do not graduate. SAT or ACT or not, there’s not ever going to be a substitute for high IQ. The dumb kids never graduate (unless they’re Ethnic Studies or sociology majors, which degrees are worthless in the real world).

    It also helps if you only apply to one UC. The application wants you to list your first three choices. So say you list Cal, UCLA and Davis. They’ll put you in the least prestigious UC. I only put one school on the application, UC Berkeley, which puts the admissions officer in a situation: if they denied my application, I would not transfer and continue my education. Somehow they let my ass in and I got my BA in 45 weeks of instruction (3 semesters, as Berkeley is the only school in the UC system that still has semesters, far more rigorous than the quarter system at the other UCs).

    It’s not just the admissions office that’s breaking the law and violating Prop 209 / California constitution. The hiring practices for every job at UC discriminate too. They just don’t call them “quotas” anymore but “placement goals” which discriminate based on sex and race. To wit:

    https://hr.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/job-groups-for-strategic-outreach-2019a.pdf

  65. @International Jew
    Getting good grades is, in part, a game: strategic choice of courses, willingness to cheat, persistent post-exam pestering of professors. It stands to reason then that whoever excelled at this game in high school, will keep it up in college.

    I've had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.

    I’ve had students who came to office hours test/midterm/final in hand, and settled in hoping to go through the whole thing from beginning to end wheedling a point here, a couple points there.

    Only numbskulls that are within small-ε below a grade boundary do that shit – which is why it has always been common practice to ensure that students who do not belong in the higher grade, get results that are far enough from the boundary to have no incentive to attempt finagling.

    Every instructor knows (or ought to) which kids belong in which grade – perhaps with the exception of compulsory first-year classes where lecture halls are full and there’s a seething throng of ‘tards who are literally a waste of resources (but a critical part of the revenue stream).

    Best strategy for finaglers is to find ways to ‘notice’ things where marks ought to be deducted. Find a few punctuation or spelling errors, or ‘notice’ that the phrasing is not to the expected standard… soon enough the ‘tards stop trying to ‘tard their way up a grade.

    In my day it was always ‘Pass’ (~D) students trying to finagle their way to a ‘Credit’ (~C) – and invariably in first-year undergraduate subjects. To (partially) obviate this, any student whose ‘raw’ mark was 1% below a grade boundary, would be adjusted to 3% below the grade boundary. Only the dimmest would fail to understand that 3% is unlikely to be made up by finagling.

    That’s just the way shit happens when the TAs are doing their job properly: the stratification of the class is done by a smart person who knows the students (and if there’s more than 1 TA, the TAs work out who’s what).

    More to the point, potential finaglers are given an incentive to do the fucking work rather than trying to improve their finagling skills.

    TAs tend to be pretty merciless, because at half-decent schools they are (generally) elite students, who would never have required finagling to materially affect their GPA.

    At the end of the day, TA ‘finagling management‘ is a victimless crime: most finagling seeks to avoid the dreaded “third quartile” (people who pass); anybody who needs to finagle in all subjects, is massively unlikely to get to a Credit average overall; a Credit average renders the entire degree a waste of time.

    So even if the finaglers managed to drag their ‘tard averages up to Credit: if someone graduates with a Credit average, nobody gives a fuck if it’s 65 or 75, because it signals that they don’t know shit about the subject (anyone who averages ~65% is ~20 percentage points – 2 grades – shy of being domain-competent).

    And if anyone is trying to finagle their way to a Distinction, then they should just fuck right off (and they’ll still be a grade short of domain-competence).

    To reframe this for a Yank audience: a Credit average would be a GPA of 2.6-ish on [0,4]. If you have a GPA of 2.6 at the end of a 4 year degree in a discipline, you don’t know shit about that discipline. (If you only do a 3 year degree in a discipline, you don’t know shit almost regardless of your GPA).

  66. @Joe, Averaged
    Smarter people are better at doing all of those things you mention.

    And more-honest people are worse. Intelligence isn’t everything that we want in a person.

    • Replies: @Joe, Averaged
    Totally agree, I was just pointing out that the behavior cited isn’t in opposition to intelligence.
  67. @Hypnotoad666
    Steve usually hones in on the statistical oddities and anomalies in these reports, but I think he may have missed one here. Take a look at the last chart for "non-graduation rate" of whites as a function of SAT score.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student's SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Of course, if these results applied to black students there would be a great hue and cry about how systemic bias and a "hostile" environment are forcing out qualified PoC. So maybe these results are evidence of academia's current hostility to Whites (it would be interesting to see a breakdown by sex as well).

    On the other hand, maybe higher IQ Whites are smart enough to figure out that a college degree isn't all it's cracked up to be, and are dropping out (a la Gates and Zuckerberg), for greener pastures in self-employment or the trades. Who knows.

    But since it doesn't fit the "unfair to marginalized people" narrative, you can bet that no one will be curious enough to figure it out.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea.

    Perhaps it’s a really small sample.

  68. Using G.P.A./ class rank has been a failure at the University of Texas. Only certain majors that pay are desirable and there are simply too many students with outstanding G.P.A.’s competing for the same majors. As far as getting into an elite college, many students find that it is getting their choice of major at a University that has high employment options after graduation is the most difficult task. It is all about major or not the name of the school these days.

    This is what happened to my son.

    Accepted to the University of Texas, but rejected from his choice of major. But the University of Texas gave him a special list of alternate majors just for him to choose from: English, Psychology and Women’s Studies. Congratulations on your acceptance into the University of Texas. Hook ’em Horns.

    Yes, I am paraphrasing my son’s University of Texas rejection from major letter. It took him a couple of reads to figure out he’d been rejected from major. As far as relying on class rank for admittance into a university, in Texas it gives students a false sense of security and an unobtainable goal that their dreams of being a Longhorn will come true. The reality is it does not matter if a student is second in their class of 600 students, has a 1520 SAT, and 5’s on all their AP exams. All in-state students should expect to get rejected from the University of Texas if their choice of major pays money upon graduation. Money paying degrees are business, engineering, and computer science.

    As to my son, I won’t be buying him a car for graduation but we will buy him a good future. He has been accepted for his major at a highly selective university that will cost much more that the University of Texas.

    My husband tells me that no matter what my son has a bright future. “He isn’t majoring in Women’s Studies. He gets to major in something worthwhile.”

    But, as far as grades or class rank, the whole discussion is irrelevant. No matter what happens there are going to be highly selective majors at state schools that are like winning the lottery to get into and I don’t see a way to fix that.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    Thanks for recounting your son's UT experience.

    I'm curious: at what point did your son receive the 'rejection from major' letter? Was it when he initially applied for application to the university, i.e. when he was still in high school? And then is it correct that he could have been admitted to UT if he'd have been willing to declare that he would major in a less-popular subject?

    If I'm reading your account accurately, then this is very interesting -- I hadn't quite realized that some American universities were so strictly enforcing admittance to common undergrad majors.

  69. @Hypnotoad666
    One more thing . . .

    Look at the charts showing the correlation between SAT scores and college GPA for Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. They show that (holding high school GPA constant), Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.

    As I recall, this "over prediction" phenomenon has been around forever. It supposedly stems from the "regression toward the mean" that results because the highest scoring individuals in a a low scoring group tend to be at the far right tail of the probability distribution.

    But the bottom line is that Blacks and Latinos do not perform better than their SAT scores indicate -- in fact, quite the opposite. The SAT is only biased "against" them in the sense that it isn't as biased in their favor as some alternative metric that could be cooked up.

    (Note: The Asian scores also show this "over-prediction" effect of SAT scores on college GPA, but I'd be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses. Others might attribute this to their SAT scores being inflate by obsessive test prep. But that doesn't ring true to me as I don't think these tests can really be gamed all that much as they're mostly dressed up IQ tests).)

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.

    La Griffe du Lion covered this way back when. It’s a multiple choice test. You could get a perfect score by guessing even if you didn’t read the questions. The less knowledgeable someone is, the more likely his correct answers will be due to luck.

  70. Hahahahaaa! Now they have second thoughts! Well, they lost out on the most intelligent, Lego-raised sons of mine, and, all the thousands, thousands, of their peers who graduated before 2017. Those professors will be stuck with having to teach entry-level Calc and Physics & Chem (HS level) to a bunch of entitled 20-year-olds, many who have been indoctrinated to believe they are victims of inequality! My sons are movin’ on to (some of them) grad school, overseas. My sons are reverse immigrants!, hahhahhaaaa Why bother to stay a tax-slave in USA when life is better for a tax-slave in Europe?

    I want to celebrate, right here, right now, that I predicted this.…more importantly, my recently-ish, late mother, predicted this: “One day Yale & MIT will regret that they did not accept my grandsons. Countries that do not see their youth as a national resource will all fail (my mother was a greater Shield Maiden than me). And, artificial means to amend historic norms will never find an end to the quantity or quality of the grievances that today’s Democrats seek, and, that, that which the youth who have been programmed by these same socialists, who have been indoctrinated, seek”

    For all the lovely young men out there who have been terribly used by the liberal agenda to make you the villain of everything, I love you.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    https://youtu.be/IbcKHbZ5yLI sometimes, give it enough time to sort out the I,i, L & l...it always sinks my ship. At least, I refrained for using the F word, hahahaaa!
  71. @Lagertha
    Hahahahaaa! Now they have second thoughts! Well, they lost out on the most intelligent, Lego-raised sons of mine, and, all the thousands, thousands, of their peers who graduated before 2017. Those professors will be stuck with having to teach entry-level Calc and Physics & Chem (HS level) to a bunch of entitled 20-year-olds, many who have been indoctrinated to believe they are victims of inequality! My sons are movin' on to (some of them) grad school, overseas. My sons are reverse immigrants!, hahhahhaaaa Why bother to stay a tax-slave in USA when life is better for a tax-slave in Europe?

    I want to celebrate, right here, right now, that I predicted this....more importantly, my recently-ish, late mother, predicted this: "One day Yale & MIT will regret that they did not accept my grandsons. Countries that do not see their youth as a national resource will all fail (my mother was a greater Shield Maiden than me). And, artificial means to amend historic norms will never find an end to the quantity or quality of the grievances that today's Democrats seek, and, that, that which the youth who have been programmed by these same socialists, who have been indoctrinated, seek"

    For all the lovely young men out there who have been terribly used by the liberal agenda to make you the villain of everything, I love you. https://youtu.be/IbcKHbZ5yLI

    sometimes, give it enough time to sort out the I,i, L & l…it always sinks my ship. At least, I refrained for using the F word, hahahaaa!

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    the reality is, most men are wondering if skin color becomes everything that defines them. Democrats/socialists have demonized white-skinned people, but, at the same time, these same, very evil white people, disparage black skinned people. Avoiding their wish for all-out race war, and for grievances to escalate... is imperative for American society. American society must go on without race hustlers always interfering.
  72. @ben tillman
    And more-honest people are worse. Intelligence isn't everything that we want in a person.

    Totally agree, I was just pointing out that the behavior cited isn’t in opposition to intelligence.

  73. @Lagertha
    https://youtu.be/IbcKHbZ5yLI sometimes, give it enough time to sort out the I,i, L & l...it always sinks my ship. At least, I refrained for using the F word, hahahaaa!

    the reality is, most men are wondering if skin color becomes everything that defines them. Democrats/socialists have demonized white-skinned people, but, at the same time, these same, very evil white people, disparage black skinned people. Avoiding their wish for all-out race war, and for grievances to escalate… is imperative for American society. American society must go on without race hustlers always interfering.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    SOMEONE "SPIKED" AND "TOOK EVERYTHING OUT OF CONTEXT." AND, AS A FINNISH CITIZEN, I WILL SUE THEM/Sue that whiny woman (always a wimp). I will sue you - bring it!
    , @Lagertha
    hahahahhahhahahaaaaaaa - confuse, confuse, confuse...I am so tired of PC culture. I want Mitch to suffer - he deserves to suffer.
  74. @Twinkie
    Asians are more likely to take STEM classes than other groups that have harder grading. This has been covered in past discussions.

    To use the accepted vernacular of colour:

    Us white people be like:

    “Let’s go to the moon!”

    [MORE]

    Orientals like Twinkie be all:

    “We’re as good at science and math as you are!”

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    I would never disparage the monumental scientific achievements of modern Europeans. On the contrary, it is to be admired immensely, which many “Orientals like Twinkie” do.

    But you seem to think, rather inaccurately, that this is a permanent and enduring situation for all times based on some unalterable racial traits, rather than outcomes based on many contingent factors.

    I wish it were so in some ways, but, alas, history shows that there are ebbs and flows to the power of Eurasian civilizations and those at the top change frequently if one takes a longer horizon of history.*

    *I am not a big fan of the Chinese, but there was a time when they boasted of more advanced inventions than Europeans. You were a sailor once, right? Look up who had sealed bulkheads on ships hundreds of years before other peoples.
  75. @Gleam
    Using G.P.A./ class rank has been a failure at the University of Texas. Only certain majors that pay are desirable and there are simply too many students with outstanding G.P.A.'s competing for the same majors. As far as getting into an elite college, many students find that it is getting their choice of major at a University that has high employment options after graduation is the most difficult task. It is all about major or not the name of the school these days.

    This is what happened to my son.

    Accepted to the University of Texas, but rejected from his choice of major. But the University of Texas gave him a special list of alternate majors just for him to choose from: English, Psychology and Women's Studies. Congratulations on your acceptance into the University of Texas. Hook 'em Horns.

    Yes, I am paraphrasing my son's University of Texas rejection from major letter. It took him a couple of reads to figure out he'd been rejected from major. As far as relying on class rank for admittance into a university, in Texas it gives students a false sense of security and an unobtainable goal that their dreams of being a Longhorn will come true. The reality is it does not matter if a student is second in their class of 600 students, has a 1520 SAT, and 5's on all their AP exams. All in-state students should expect to get rejected from the University of Texas if their choice of major pays money upon graduation. Money paying degrees are business, engineering, and computer science.

    As to my son, I won't be buying him a car for graduation but we will buy him a good future. He has been accepted for his major at a highly selective university that will cost much more that the University of Texas.

    My husband tells me that no matter what my son has a bright future. "He isn't majoring in Women's Studies. He gets to major in something worthwhile."

    But, as far as grades or class rank, the whole discussion is irrelevant. No matter what happens there are going to be highly selective majors at state schools that are like winning the lottery to get into and I don't see a way to fix that.

    Thanks for recounting your son’s UT experience.

    I’m curious: at what point did your son receive the ‘rejection from major’ letter? Was it when he initially applied for application to the university, i.e. when he was still in high school? And then is it correct that he could have been admitted to UT if he’d have been willing to declare that he would major in a less-popular subject?

    If I’m reading your account accurately, then this is very interesting — I hadn’t quite realized that some American universities were so strictly enforcing admittance to common undergrad majors.

    • Replies: @Penskefile
    I'm not the person who you replied to and asked, but my son also just completed the UT Austin admissions process and I can offer my two cents:

    Some students accepted to Engineering, Business and Computer Science (which are the three most competitive) are notified within 30 days of their application. You must indicate a first-choice major and a second choice major on your application. UT-Austin assigns every applicant an academic index (based on GPA and ACT/SAT scores) and a "Personal Achievement" index, which factors in your extracurricular activities and your essays. This is your chance to begin accumulating titles such as black, trans, disadvantaged ROTC cadet

    The engineering, business, and CS programs will admit students right away if they are in the top cell of (AI, PAI) scores. They are very attuned to the "yield" this will produce. The priority deadline is Nov. 1 and you are guaranteed a decision by Jan 31.

    That gives the school three months to sort out the rest of the applications. Come late Jan, "waves" of decisions are released. Some clearly non-qualified students are notified of their decline throughout, but there aren't as many as you would think because most know how hard it is and don't even apply

    There is a process called CAP whereby the student is given the option to enroll at another UT Campus (Arlington, San Antonio, Tyler etc) and are guaranteed admission to Liberal Arts if they complete one year with a 3.0 GPA They may also apply to Eng. Bus, CS but its VERY difficult to be accepted. Think of this as a deferment to prove your chops

    If you are in the top 6%, you are guaranteed, but that doesn't mean to your major, only to Liberal Arts and maybe a couple other schools like Mass Comm

    So at the end of Jan, everyone is waiting to see if they got into Bus. Eng CS (if thats what they want) or if they are "CAP'd"

    To answer your question, you can play the game and apply for a less competitive major and then seek to transfer, but the odds are very much against the transfer. You're better off going to A&M for engineering/business or UH/UTD/Tech for business if you're set on that as a major


    My son was not top 6% (not even close) but had very good test scores and was admitted to Liberal Arts where he will major in Economics, which at UT is a very strong and rigorous program. I'm not saying it's MIT or Stanford, but pretty good and this was his dream school.
  76. @Autochthon
    To use the accepted vernacular of colour:

    Us white people be like:

    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/d6/ac/25d6accc7b019af5e850427d5cbc4d1d.jpg

    "Let's go to the moon!"



    https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/system/news_items/main_images/337_s69-39961.jpg

    Orientals like Twinkie be all:

    https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/t/angry-asian-man-portrait-funny-mad-face-angry-face-asian-man-portrait-97908255.jpg

    "We're as good at science and math as you are!"

    I would never disparage the monumental scientific achievements of modern Europeans. On the contrary, it is to be admired immensely, which many “Orientals like Twinkie” do.

    But you seem to think, rather inaccurately, that this is a permanent and enduring situation for all times based on some unalterable racial traits, rather than outcomes based on many contingent factors.

    I wish it were so in some ways, but, alas, history shows that there are ebbs and flows to the power of Eurasian civilizations and those at the top change frequently if one takes a longer horizon of history.*

    *I am not a big fan of the Chinese, but there was a time when they boasted of more advanced inventions than Europeans. You were a sailor once, right? Look up who had sealed bulkheads on ships hundreds of years before other peoples.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    But you seem to think, rather inaccurately, that this is a permanent and enduring situation for all times based on some unalterable racial traits, rather than outcomes based on many contingent factors.
     
    I'm inclined to agree. While chance favors the prepared mind, serendipity accounts for a great many outcomes.
  77. @res

    It looks like the highest GPA at graduation is earned by whites with SAT scores over 1450 and GPAs of 4.25 or higher. They appear to do slightly better than Asians with similar credentials. Or maybe they take easier classes?
     
    That's why college GPA is such a terrible metric to use. About 20 years ago Valen Johnson worked hard (but failed) to have an alternative measure used at Duke.
    An alternative to traditional GPA for evaluating student performance
    https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1030037959

    Abstract:

    In response to the growing problem of grade inflation in American undergraduate institutions, alternatives to GPA and GPA-based student assessment are discussed. One alternative summary, based on a Bayesian latent trait formulation, eliminates many of the inequities associated with GPA-based measures and has been proposed as a replacement for GPA-based class ranks at Duke University.
     
    He also wrote a 2003 book on grade inflation reviewed here: https://www.math.lsu.edu/~mcgehee/Grading.html

    His approach actually made it to a faculty vote at Duke, but was narrowly defeated (also note that he is no longer at Duke, coincidence?). This article talks about that and gives some history as well as mentioning other people working in this area:
    https://www.1843magazine.com/ideas/the-daily/the-extraordinary-silliness-of-american-college-grading

    A simpler GPA adjustment approach: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/07/01/new-approach-grade-inflation

    P.S. I wonder what would happen to the SAT and HS GPA correlations if an adjusted college GPA was used instead. My bet is the relative SAT advantage would increase, but by how much?

    Steve Hsu had a psychometrician on his podcast about a month back. There was an effort a decade or two for a post Bachelor’s graduation test to certify if you learned anything in college. The only thing with predictive power on the test was IQ. Some majors are just more G-loaded than others.

  78. @Hypnotoad666
    One more thing . . .

    Look at the charts showing the correlation between SAT scores and college GPA for Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. They show that (holding high school GPA constant), Blacks and Latinos achieve substantially lower college GPAs than Whites with the same SAT scores.

    This means that SAT scores give Blacks and Latinos more credit than they deserve in terms of assessing likelihood of college success. In other words, using SAT scores as a predictor actually creates a bias in favor of Blacks and Latinos. As is so often the case, the PC conventional wisdom is exactly backwards.

    As I recall, this "over prediction" phenomenon has been around forever. It supposedly stems from the "regression toward the mean" that results because the highest scoring individuals in a a low scoring group tend to be at the far right tail of the probability distribution.

    But the bottom line is that Blacks and Latinos do not perform better than their SAT scores indicate -- in fact, quite the opposite. The SAT is only biased "against" them in the sense that it isn't as biased in their favor as some alternative metric that could be cooked up.

    (Note: The Asian scores also show this "over-prediction" effect of SAT scores on college GPA, but I'd be willing to wager this is mostly due to Asians taking far more difficult engineering courses. Others might attribute this to their SAT scores being inflate by obsessive test prep. But that doesn't ring true to me as I don't think these tests can really be gamed all that much as they're mostly dressed up IQ tests).)

    My guess is that despite the uc systems ostensible lack of affirmative action, blacks and Latinos get a boost from their race and get into better schools for their sat score.

    Essentially, I bet a 1350 asian is unlikely to get into Berkeley. A 1350 black would be very likely to get in. So the blacks end up with lower gpa since they are at harder schools and at the lower end of the sat range for that school.

  79. @Russ

    What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?
     
    In the corporate world, we have just been taught in our latest Diversity Inclusion Equity Yearly Training (DIE YT) that "Emotional Quotient" is a thing. Perhaps enterprising educators can both categorize it as an overarchingly favorable attribute, and correlate it strongly to performance traits such as soul and rhythm.

    Didn’t Harvard pioneer the EQ over IQ idea, when they used low scores for sociability as a way to justify rejecting a bunch of Asian applicants.

  80. @The Last Real Calvinist
    Thanks for recounting your son's UT experience.

    I'm curious: at what point did your son receive the 'rejection from major' letter? Was it when he initially applied for application to the university, i.e. when he was still in high school? And then is it correct that he could have been admitted to UT if he'd have been willing to declare that he would major in a less-popular subject?

    If I'm reading your account accurately, then this is very interesting -- I hadn't quite realized that some American universities were so strictly enforcing admittance to common undergrad majors.

    I’m not the person who you replied to and asked, but my son also just completed the UT Austin admissions process and I can offer my two cents:

    Some students accepted to Engineering, Business and Computer Science (which are the three most competitive) are notified within 30 days of their application. You must indicate a first-choice major and a second choice major on your application. UT-Austin assigns every applicant an academic index (based on GPA and ACT/SAT scores) and a “Personal Achievement” index, which factors in your extracurricular activities and your essays. This is your chance to begin accumulating titles such as black, trans, disadvantaged ROTC cadet

    The engineering, business, and CS programs will admit students right away if they are in the top cell of (AI, PAI) scores. They are very attuned to the “yield” this will produce. The priority deadline is Nov. 1 and you are guaranteed a decision by Jan 31.

    That gives the school three months to sort out the rest of the applications. Come late Jan, “waves” of decisions are released. Some clearly non-qualified students are notified of their decline throughout, but there aren’t as many as you would think because most know how hard it is and don’t even apply

    There is a process called CAP whereby the student is given the option to enroll at another UT Campus (Arlington, San Antonio, Tyler etc) and are guaranteed admission to Liberal Arts if they complete one year with a 3.0 GPA They may also apply to Eng. Bus, CS but its VERY difficult to be accepted. Think of this as a deferment to prove your chops

    If you are in the top 6%, you are guaranteed, but that doesn’t mean to your major, only to Liberal Arts and maybe a couple other schools like Mass Comm

    So at the end of Jan, everyone is waiting to see if they got into Bus. Eng CS (if thats what they want) or if they are “CAP’d”

    To answer your question, you can play the game and apply for a less competitive major and then seek to transfer, but the odds are very much against the transfer. You’re better off going to A&M for engineering/business or UH/UTD/Tech for business if you’re set on that as a major

    My son was not top 6% (not even close) but had very good test scores and was admitted to Liberal Arts where he will major in Economics, which at UT is a very strong and rigorous program. I’m not saying it’s MIT or Stanford, but pretty good and this was his dream school.

    • Agree: Triumph104
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    Thanks so much for this very clear and comprehensive explanation. It must be very stressful for applicants and their parents.

    Many congratulations on your son's admission to UT.
  81. @Hypnotoad666
    Steve usually hones in on the statistical oddities and anomalies in these reports, but I think he may have missed one here. Take a look at the last chart for "non-graduation rate" of whites as a function of SAT score.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student's SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Of course, if these results applied to black students there would be a great hue and cry about how systemic bias and a "hostile" environment are forcing out qualified PoC. So maybe these results are evidence of academia's current hostility to Whites (it would be interesting to see a breakdown by sex as well).

    On the other hand, maybe higher IQ Whites are smart enough to figure out that a college degree isn't all it's cracked up to be, and are dropping out (a la Gates and Zuckerberg), for greener pastures in self-employment or the trades. Who knows.

    But since it doesn't fit the "unfair to marginalized people" narrative, you can bet that no one will be curious enough to figure it out.

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student’s SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.

    Actually, Asians with 3.25-3.5 GPAs also exhibit a similar dropoff in graduation rates at higher SAT scores, and have a pretty flat or very slightly negative correlation at 3-3.25 and 3.5-3.75.

    I believe the explanation for this phenomenon is that these are classic bright underachievers. Given today’s high school grade inflation, a 3.0-3.5 GPA is quite low, particularly for students this bright. Whether due to lack of motivation, organization, social skills, or study skills, or perhaps institutional failure to engage their interest, they don’t do well at school. I wouldn’t be surprised if there aren’t white and Asian kids who also have similar SATs with even lower GPAs, maybe put off by the political bs and message that they aren’t of interest amid all the jocks, popular kids with sociable parents, and URMs who matter more to The System.

    So these 3.0+ kids may manage to get into Berkeley on the strength of their high SAT scores and probably also some strong recommendations from teachers whose classes or subjects that they managed to shine in or really creative projects, but once there they don’t have the conscientiousness or grit to get through to graduation. Probably most of them are male.

    I should know because I was such a student. My high school grades were mediocre but I had the highest SATs in my class at a suburban public school. I went off to a selective college that gambled on me and managed to get kicked out for drugs by sophomore year while already on academic probation. I still wonder how it would have gone if I had joined the Navy for the Nuclear Power program that I was recruited for based on my 99th %tile ASVABs. Maybe I would’ve screwed that up too, or maybe the structure would have been a good thing for me.

    At any rate, I ended up working several blue collar jobs for years while taking college classes on and off, got a tech degree from a community college, worked in biotech for awhile, then met a very brainy woman who helped me get my life even more on track so that I earned a 4.0 in classes at the local state university, took subject SATs with high scores, and applied to the Univerisity of Oxford and got an unconditional offer after a structured academic interview. I graduated from Oxford in my 30s, married her, and had a daughter. So, happy ending and I am grateful.

    • Replies: @education realist
    hahahaah. Yeah, no. You aren't the sort that's getting admitted into UC with a 3.25 and then dropping out.

    I think people are missing the fact that it's virtually impossible for whites and Asians with GPAs in the 3.25 range to be accepted at any UC other than Merced or Riverside. UC doesn't have legacy. Looking at UC Santa Cruz, the "lowest" ranked after Merced and Riverside, and just 35% of students have a GPA below 3.5. Safe bet that most of those are Hispanic or black.

    I think the data's wonky, but if it's accurate the most likely guess is athletes or musicians or some other non-academic admit. Maybe they're transfering out and just being coded as failure to graduate.

    But to be sure, you'd have to learn how many whites and Asians were admitted with that low a GPA and see how it happened, because grades are weighted 75%.
  82. I’m curious: at what point did your son receive the ‘rejection from major’ letter? Was it when he initially applied for application to the university, i.e. when he was still in high school? And then is it correct that he could have been admitted to UT if he’d have been willing to declare that he would major in a less-popular subject?

    I will attempt to answer some questions.

    My son is still in high school. He applied to UT in October of 2019. He was rejected from his choice of major in January 2020. At this point UT thinks that he is going to attend as an undecided major in the Fall of 2020. By law UT must honor this and let my son decide to go as an undecided major. It is his choice.

    Technically, biology is the most popular major at UT. I think my son would have gained admittance into Biology. From what I have heard most Biology majors get in with SAT’s in the 1200’s. But as far as what UT actually does it is a big mystery. Most of what I have learned is through rumor. UT Austin Admissions is locked in a shroud of mystery and they are refusing to release data. As a Texas taxpayer, I would like more transparency.

    As far as other colleges accepting students based on major, I have heard they do. For the most part it does not matter where the student applies, engineering major are rejected with higher scores than history majors. But, this is NOT an issue that receives any attention from the mainstream media. The reality for Generation Z is that getting into their choice of major is far more difficult than getting into Harvard.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    Thanks so much for your reply, Gleam. This process sounds infuriating and stressful, and I agree its vagaries are not well-publicized.

    Just curious: will your son go ahead to UT and hope to get into a major that suits him once he's there -- and perhaps try to transfer over to his first choice of major -- or will he go to a different university that will allow him to study what he wants? It's a tough choice.

  83. @Twinkie
    I would never disparage the monumental scientific achievements of modern Europeans. On the contrary, it is to be admired immensely, which many “Orientals like Twinkie” do.

    But you seem to think, rather inaccurately, that this is a permanent and enduring situation for all times based on some unalterable racial traits, rather than outcomes based on many contingent factors.

    I wish it were so in some ways, but, alas, history shows that there are ebbs and flows to the power of Eurasian civilizations and those at the top change frequently if one takes a longer horizon of history.*

    *I am not a big fan of the Chinese, but there was a time when they boasted of more advanced inventions than Europeans. You were a sailor once, right? Look up who had sealed bulkheads on ships hundreds of years before other peoples.

    But you seem to think, rather inaccurately, that this is a permanent and enduring situation for all times based on some unalterable racial traits, rather than outcomes based on many contingent factors.

    I’m inclined to agree. While chance favors the prepared mind, serendipity accounts for a great many outcomes.

  84. @Russ

    What questions could they possibly come up with that aren’t cognitive that blacks and Hispanics would do better on than whites and test-prepping Asians?
     
    In the corporate world, we have just been taught in our latest Diversity Inclusion Equity Yearly Training (DIE YT) that "Emotional Quotient" is a thing. Perhaps enterprising educators can both categorize it as an overarchingly favorable attribute, and correlate it strongly to performance traits such as soul and rhythm.

    Oh, academia is doing this too, Russ. I.e., writing performance reviews on the basis of one crazy lady or tranny or quad screamer b!tching about whatever whatever from an interaction with someone s/h/e didn’t like…and that gets foisted onto the attacked individual as his (usually) shortcoming that must be fixed with…well, it’s not clear what, since the grift is rigged so that the attacked individual never can win. So to answer Jim Don Bob’s question, the denominator is 0.

    Just count on the inevitability of this year’s Feminist Encounter Group-Flavored batguano touchyfeely passive-aggressive politicking “research” becoming engraved-in-stone HR practice in 5 to 7 years. This is how academics maintain their end of the grift. It’s as James Lileks once said, “Fashion: it’s a maze in a labyrinth of funhouse mirrors, and you’re always lost and wrong.”

    However we can rest assured that Dr. LaQuanda Quetzalfeather-ben-Arkancide, Ed.D. (blir/blur pronouns) will be happy to apprise everyone of the day’s appropriate religious forms and devotions in thousands-of-words memos of polysyllabic opacity. Bearing in mind that you’re going to hell anyway.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    However we can rest assured that Dr. LaQuanda Quetzalfeather-ben-Arkancide, Ed.D. (blir/blur pronouns) will be happy to apprise everyone of the day’s appropriate religious forms and devotions in thousands-of-words memos of polysyllabic opacity. Bearing in mind that you’re going to hell anyway.

     

    That's an epic paragraph, Olorin -- it deserves a gold box, or perhaps a infernal sulphuric yellow one, at least.
  85. @JUSA

    The report also found that test scores are a better predictor of college performance than high school grades but that UC weighs grades more heavily in admission decisions.
     
    SAT scores usually fall within a range, no matter how many times someone takes it.
    The amount of grade inflation that goes on in our schools is astounding. Even in good suburban schools, you can get a C in the final and still end up with an A grade as long as you turn in all your homework dutifully. I'm sure it's even worse in low income schools.

    Even in good suburban schools, you can get a C in the final and still end up with an A grade as long as you turn in all your homework dutifully.

    yup

    I remember a high school class where people failed the final but still got A’s in the class. I begged the teacher to give me two full points on my final average so I could get a B in the class. I got a B on the final exam, but I was the only person who passed the final. And that was in the 80’s.

    Oh yeah, it’s worse now.

  86. @Penskefile
    I'm not the person who you replied to and asked, but my son also just completed the UT Austin admissions process and I can offer my two cents:

    Some students accepted to Engineering, Business and Computer Science (which are the three most competitive) are notified within 30 days of their application. You must indicate a first-choice major and a second choice major on your application. UT-Austin assigns every applicant an academic index (based on GPA and ACT/SAT scores) and a "Personal Achievement" index, which factors in your extracurricular activities and your essays. This is your chance to begin accumulating titles such as black, trans, disadvantaged ROTC cadet

    The engineering, business, and CS programs will admit students right away if they are in the top cell of (AI, PAI) scores. They are very attuned to the "yield" this will produce. The priority deadline is Nov. 1 and you are guaranteed a decision by Jan 31.

    That gives the school three months to sort out the rest of the applications. Come late Jan, "waves" of decisions are released. Some clearly non-qualified students are notified of their decline throughout, but there aren't as many as you would think because most know how hard it is and don't even apply

    There is a process called CAP whereby the student is given the option to enroll at another UT Campus (Arlington, San Antonio, Tyler etc) and are guaranteed admission to Liberal Arts if they complete one year with a 3.0 GPA They may also apply to Eng. Bus, CS but its VERY difficult to be accepted. Think of this as a deferment to prove your chops

    If you are in the top 6%, you are guaranteed, but that doesn't mean to your major, only to Liberal Arts and maybe a couple other schools like Mass Comm

    So at the end of Jan, everyone is waiting to see if they got into Bus. Eng CS (if thats what they want) or if they are "CAP'd"

    To answer your question, you can play the game and apply for a less competitive major and then seek to transfer, but the odds are very much against the transfer. You're better off going to A&M for engineering/business or UH/UTD/Tech for business if you're set on that as a major


    My son was not top 6% (not even close) but had very good test scores and was admitted to Liberal Arts where he will major in Economics, which at UT is a very strong and rigorous program. I'm not saying it's MIT or Stanford, but pretty good and this was his dream school.

    Thanks so much for this very clear and comprehensive explanation. It must be very stressful for applicants and their parents.

    Many congratulations on your son’s admission to UT.

  87. @Gleam
    I’m curious: at what point did your son receive the ‘rejection from major’ letter? Was it when he initially applied for application to the university, i.e. when he was still in high school? And then is it correct that he could have been admitted to UT if he’d have been willing to declare that he would major in a less-popular subject?

    I will attempt to answer some questions.

    My son is still in high school. He applied to UT in October of 2019. He was rejected from his choice of major in January 2020. At this point UT thinks that he is going to attend as an undecided major in the Fall of 2020. By law UT must honor this and let my son decide to go as an undecided major. It is his choice.

    Technically, biology is the most popular major at UT. I think my son would have gained admittance into Biology. From what I have heard most Biology majors get in with SAT's in the 1200's. But as far as what UT actually does it is a big mystery. Most of what I have learned is through rumor. UT Austin Admissions is locked in a shroud of mystery and they are refusing to release data. As a Texas taxpayer, I would like more transparency.

    As far as other colleges accepting students based on major, I have heard they do. For the most part it does not matter where the student applies, engineering major are rejected with higher scores than history majors. But, this is NOT an issue that receives any attention from the mainstream media. The reality for Generation Z is that getting into their choice of major is far more difficult than getting into Harvard.

    Thanks so much for your reply, Gleam. This process sounds infuriating and stressful, and I agree its vagaries are not well-publicized.

    Just curious: will your son go ahead to UT and hope to get into a major that suits him once he’s there — and perhaps try to transfer over to his first choice of major — or will he go to a different university that will allow him to study what he wants? It’s a tough choice.

  88. @Olorin
    Oh, academia is doing this too, Russ. I.e., writing performance reviews on the basis of one crazy lady or tranny or quad screamer b!tching about whatever whatever from an interaction with someone s/h/e didn't like...and that gets foisted onto the attacked individual as his (usually) shortcoming that must be fixed with...well, it's not clear what, since the grift is rigged so that the attacked individual never can win. So to answer Jim Don Bob's question, the denominator is 0.

    Just count on the inevitability of this year's Feminist Encounter Group-Flavored batguano touchyfeely passive-aggressive politicking "research" becoming engraved-in-stone HR practice in 5 to 7 years. This is how academics maintain their end of the grift. It's as James Lileks once said, "Fashion: it's a maze in a labyrinth of funhouse mirrors, and you're always lost and wrong."

    However we can rest assured that Dr. LaQuanda Quetzalfeather-ben-Arkancide, Ed.D. (blir/blur pronouns) will be happy to apprise everyone of the day's appropriate religious forms and devotions in thousands-of-words memos of polysyllabic opacity. Bearing in mind that you're going to hell anyway.

    However we can rest assured that Dr. LaQuanda Quetzalfeather-ben-Arkancide, Ed.D. (blir/blur pronouns) will be happy to apprise everyone of the day’s appropriate religious forms and devotions in thousands-of-words memos of polysyllabic opacity. Bearing in mind that you’re going to hell anyway.

    That’s an epic paragraph, Olorin — it deserves a gold box, or perhaps a infernal sulphuric yellow one, at least.

  89. @Lockean Proviso

    For those with high-school GPAs between 3.0 and 3.75, the White graduation rate is actually negatively correlated to high SAT scores. In other words, the higher a White student’s SAT score, the more likely he is to bail out of college.

    This is completely different from every other ethnic group, in which there is a smooth positive correlation between SAT results and graduation rates. Why are Whites different in this respect? I have no idea. But that would seem to be a really interesting question.
     

    Actually, Asians with 3.25-3.5 GPAs also exhibit a similar dropoff in graduation rates at higher SAT scores, and have a pretty flat or very slightly negative correlation at 3-3.25 and 3.5-3.75.

    I believe the explanation for this phenomenon is that these are classic bright underachievers. Given today's high school grade inflation, a 3.0-3.5 GPA is quite low, particularly for students this bright. Whether due to lack of motivation, organization, social skills, or study skills, or perhaps institutional failure to engage their interest, they don't do well at school. I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't white and Asian kids who also have similar SATs with even lower GPAs, maybe put off by the political bs and message that they aren't of interest amid all the jocks, popular kids with sociable parents, and URMs who matter more to The System.

    So these 3.0+ kids may manage to get into Berkeley on the strength of their high SAT scores and probably also some strong recommendations from teachers whose classes or subjects that they managed to shine in or really creative projects, but once there they don't have the conscientiousness or grit to get through to graduation. Probably most of them are male.

    I should know because I was such a student. My high school grades were mediocre but I had the highest SATs in my class at a suburban public school. I went off to a selective college that gambled on me and managed to get kicked out for drugs by sophomore year while already on academic probation. I still wonder how it would have gone if I had joined the Navy for the Nuclear Power program that I was recruited for based on my 99th %tile ASVABs. Maybe I would've screwed that up too, or maybe the structure would have been a good thing for me.

    At any rate, I ended up working several blue collar jobs for years while taking college classes on and off, got a tech degree from a community college, worked in biotech for awhile, then met a very brainy woman who helped me get my life even more on track so that I earned a 4.0 in classes at the local state university, took subject SATs with high scores, and applied to the Univerisity of Oxford and got an unconditional offer after a structured academic interview. I graduated from Oxford in my 30s, married her, and had a daughter. So, happy ending and I am grateful.

    hahahaah. Yeah, no. You aren’t the sort that’s getting admitted into UC with a 3.25 and then dropping out.

    I think people are missing the fact that it’s virtually impossible for whites and Asians with GPAs in the 3.25 range to be accepted at any UC other than Merced or Riverside. UC doesn’t have legacy. Looking at UC Santa Cruz, the “lowest” ranked after Merced and Riverside, and just 35% of students have a GPA below 3.5. Safe bet that most of those are Hispanic or black.

    I think the data’s wonky, but if it’s accurate the most likely guess is athletes or musicians or some other non-academic admit. Maybe they’re transfering out and just being coded as failure to graduate.

    But to be sure, you’d have to learn how many whites and Asians were admitted with that low a GPA and see how it happened, because grades are weighted 75%.

  90. @Lagertha
    the reality is, most men are wondering if skin color becomes everything that defines them. Democrats/socialists have demonized white-skinned people, but, at the same time, these same, very evil white people, disparage black skinned people. Avoiding their wish for all-out race war, and for grievances to escalate... is imperative for American society. American society must go on without race hustlers always interfering.

    SOMEONE “SPIKED” AND “TOOK EVERYTHING OUT OF CONTEXT.” AND, AS A FINNISH CITIZEN, I WILL SUE THEM/Sue that whiny woman (always a wimp). I will sue you – bring it!

  91. @Lagertha
    the reality is, most men are wondering if skin color becomes everything that defines them. Democrats/socialists have demonized white-skinned people, but, at the same time, these same, very evil white people, disparage black skinned people. Avoiding their wish for all-out race war, and for grievances to escalate... is imperative for American society. American society must go on without race hustlers always interfering.

    hahahahhahhahahaaaaaaa – confuse, confuse, confuse…I am so tired of PC culture. I want Mitch to suffer – he deserves to suffer.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2