The SAT is adding an ‘adversity score’ that rates students’ hardships - The Boston Globe (crime)

[Idontwanttocheckmymessage]

The SAT is adding an ‘adversity score’ that rates students’ hardships. The greater the level of a student's adversity, the higher he or she will score. A student's SAT adversity score will be reported to colleges but not to the student. It will be up to the colleges to decide how much weight to assign to this score.

How will this new SAT adversity score potentially impact the desirability of specific MA school districts?

"There are 15 variables in three different areas: family environment, neighborhood environment and high school environment.

The neighborhood environment includes the crime rate, poverty rate, housing values and vacancy rate.

The family environment includes median income, whether the household is single parent, education level of the parent and whether the family speaks English as a second language.

The high school environment includes curricular rigor, the free lunch rate, how many Advanced Placement courses are available and how frequently students "undermatch," or go to colleges that are less selective than the ones they are qualified to attend."

https://m.phys.org/news/2019-05-sat-...oblematic.html
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...KTM/story.html

[BosYuppie]

Very interesting. I think people who bought in AAA-rated school districts won't be adversely impacted, and it should certainly be a boon to people in crappier districts. The middle, as usual, may be squeezed by this. But I'm ok with it if it gets some deserving kids in poorer socioeconomic areas a shot. There's still going to be opportunity for social mobility for people in the middle.

[OutdoorLover]

I think it's fine. It's just another piece of data that colleges can take into their decision if they want to, and if they don't they can ignore it. I can certainly understand that a child who scores 1300 on the SAT, and didn't have the role models at home and in the neighborhood, the wise mentoring from their parents, the top teachers, the fancy computers and college prep camps, the expensive tutors, maybe even the stability, the physical and emotional security at home, in the the neighborhood and in the classroom, is likely significantly brighter and more motivated than someone who has every advantage that one can have and also scores a 1300.

I've seen people rant about the flaws in this score, but you know what, it's easy to think of how the essay part of an application may be misleading (someone else wrote it), how the letters of recommendation may be misleading (may just reflect the personal feelings of the author about the student, good or bad, rather than the objective attributes of the student)... there is no perfect data source that is always going to be 100% accurate, fair to every student, and tell you everything that you need to know to make a good admission decision. I think more info, a more complete picture, is good.

[in_newengland]

I always like an attempt to make things fair but how can they really assess the family? For instance, just because someone grew up in an educated two parent family in a nice town doesn't mean they are advantaged. That kid could have a drunken parent or other kind of dysfunctional family. Just because there are two educated parents doesn't necessarily mean the kid is at an advantage. There's a probability that the kid has an advantage but pity the kid who looks good statistically but the reality doesn't match.

OTOH, I can definitely see where speaking a different language at home would be a disadvantage.

But judging a family environment can be daunting. Statistics can be deceiving.

I think it would be more accurate to judge the neighborhood and the school itself. We all know that some high schools are very difficult while others just pass kids along. Earning a "B" grade at a difficult high school would be like getting an "A" at an easier school.

I think the adversity score could be provided separately, not added or subtracted from the student's actual score. Then the school could see how well the student performed and still compare it with the adversity score. (Don't know if I'm making sense, but I think the actual SAT score should stand. The adversity score should be separate.)

[chicagoliz]

It strikes me as a little odd, because all of these things should be ascertainable from other parts of the application. Some are questions that are outright asked. Some can be determined from the geographic area or the school the student attends. Others can be gleaned from the essays and recommendations and surmised from work experiences and any extra curricular activities.

Reducing all of these just to a number seems kind of arbitrary and meaningless.

[personone]

I was weary of it at first, but saw a report on TV about it. The "adversity score" is only reported to colleges. The reported score that the student receives is the same un-altered, regular SAT score that they earned based on actual scoring. The students never know what their recalibrated "adversity score" is. Only the school will receive this score along with the regular SAT score. So really, it's just another number schools can use. Not sure how MA schools will use it. It will probably be up to the individual school.

[massnative71]

Why not just give everybody a 1600 and call it a day.