
MIT to no longer consider SAT subject tests in admissions decisions - s3r3nity
https://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/a-special-announcement-about-sat-subject-tests/
======
knzhou
Anybody cheering the exclusion of some test or other, because it was a pain to
study for in high school, is simply not noticing the frog-boiling secondary
effects going on. Every bit of emphasis taken out of objective results mean
more advantage for smooth talking, photogenic, well-connected people.

Yes, some misguided parents waste thousands of dollars on SAT courses. But
students can also prep using the $20 official book, which is what I did, and
what I still regard as the best option. Even if money helps incrementally for
tests, it helps for everything else even more. International volunteer work?
An inspiring (i.e. college counselor approved) essay? Recommendation letters
from authoritative people? Anything that requires equipment, like computer
labs or robotics? It all costs money -- and in many cases literally measures
nothing besides how much money you have.

~~~
dawg-
What you call a "smooth-talker" is what someone else would call an articulate,
socially well-adjusted person who can communicate their values and opinions in
an intelligent way and who is comfortable making connections with others.
Perhaps if this was the standard college admissions used, public schools would
have more incentive to educate students as functional humans rather than test-
taking drones.

~~~
pdonis
The problem is that "articulate, socially well-adjusted person who can
communicate their values and opinions in an intelligent way and who is
comfortable making connections with others" is (a) highly subjective, and (b)
only a means to an end. The end is to have a productive civil society where
people do not prey on other people. Unfortunately, all these highly subjective
characteristics are used by people to prey on other people instead of to help
with having a productive, civil society. So by themselves they can't be used
as a standard. There has to be some objective criterion to distinguish people
who can actually contribute to a productive civil society from people who prey
on other people.

~~~
adamsea
Distrusting social skills, linguistic ability, and emotional intelligence
doesn't sound like a recipe for success.

It's not like there aren't plenty of engineers, scientists, math folks, i.e.
those "honest", quantitative folks, who aren't also crappy or deceptive
people.

Just look at Facebook! ;)

~~~
pdonis
_> Distrusting social skills, linguistic ability, and emotional intelligence
doesn't sound like a recipe for success._

It's not a matter of "trusting" vs. "distrusting" them. It's a matter of what
universities (and other exclusive institutions, for that matter) select for.
If you select for "social skills, linguistic ability, and emotional
intelligence" without also having any objective way of measuring actual
productive potential, not to mention evaluating a person's actual willingness
to use their talents in support of a cooperative civil society, you're going
to get a lot of people who will be very good at preying on others and using
the system they are gaining entrance to as a tool to that end.

 _> It's not like there aren't plenty of engineers, scientists, math folks,
i.e. those "honest", quantitative folks, who aren't also crappy or deceptive
people_

Yes, that's true, but without those social skills they do a lot less damage,
because they can't get very many people to interact with them.

------
yardie
I used to think the SATs were fair. Until I found out how much money was being
spent on SAT prep. And those expensive prep courses had the potential to
increase scores over 100 points.

I took the recommended SAT prep course through my high school. It was 2
weekends of going over material that might be on the exam and a workbook
recommended by The College Board. Imagine my surprise going to university and
meeting students much richer than I who had multi year SAT prep courses with
actual exam questions!

~~~
saithound
The SAT is not fair. By taking an expensive prep course, you can potentially
increase your SAT score by 100 (although that's quite extreme, the average
improvement attributed to SAT prep is closer to 20 points). That's a
significant, but not earth-shattering improvement: it moves you from the 75th
percentile to the 84th, or from the 97th percentile to the 99th.

Now let's compare that to other criteria used in the college admissions
process.

It's way easier to have impressive and relevant extracurricular activities if
you're rich and go to a good school. And unlike SAT prep, acquiring good
extracurriculars will definitely take years of your time and money.

Well-written admissions essay? MIT requires one. But you do it at home,
instead of a tightly controlled testing center. So if you're rich enough, you
can have ghost-written admissions essays. Needless to say, this process can
turn even a completely worthless essay into an impressive one.

Creative portfolio? Unless you're in the 99th percentile of musical talent,
the difference between "I write songs that I play on an old guitar" and "an
orchestra performed my composition" is money. The former is probably not even
75th percentile; the latter, probably 95+.

Alumni parents who would be likely to donate big bucks? You don't need an
expensive prep course to get that, yet it can provide your application with a
much bigger boost than 100 SAT points. And unlike the SAT, if you don't have
alumni parents to begin with, then you'll never get this boost, no matter how
much extra work you put in.

The SAT is not fair. But it's the fairest admissions criterion used by U.S.
universities today.

(note: MIT still relies on the SAT; today's announcement concerns the SAT
Subject Tests)

~~~
commandlinefan
> it's the fairest admissions criterion

I have yet to see an "abolish standardized tests" type suggest a workable
alternative (or even an unworkable one).

~~~
ghaff
You don't _need_ to use the SAT or ACT as a criterion. The problem if you
don't is probably two-fold.

1.) You're throwing out a signal that has proven to be pretty reliable in at
least establishing a floor as what students have a good chance of succeeding
and

2.) As a related matter, it's a very simple, quantitative, standardized metric
(with decent predictive power) that lets you bucket applicants pretty easily.

Do you maybe throw out some applicants who are really bad at standardized
tests, but would otherwise thrive in an undergraduate academic setting?
Probably. But the data suggests that standardized testing is a pretty good
predictor of success in school (which, of course, is not necessarily the same
as success in life).

------
Dalrymple
This is indeed a strange decision for MIT. The conventional wisdom has long
been that the SAT subject tests are MORE predictive of future success at MIT,
because the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal
for the subject tests. While there are reports of people raising their scores
artificially on the non-subject tests by hundreds of points through these
short-term methods, the subjects tests have long had a reputation as being
more representative of what you really know.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> The conventional wisdom has long been that the SAT subject tests are MORE
> predictive of future success at MIT, because the influence of test prep,
> cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests.

Who cares what the conventional wisdom says? The psychometric results are that
SAT I scores and SAT II scores predict performance about equally well in
isolation and don't have more predictive value in combination than they do in
isolation. In other words, they measure exactly the same thing.

(Contrast the other major predictor, high school GPA, where the predictive
value of considering GPA + SAT in combination somewhat exceeds the predictive
value of either metric individually.)

~~~
posterboy
There is another implication as a consequence of the statement "the influence
of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests."
That is, I first read thag _the students don 't suffer under these
conditions_. It is a valuable trait no doubt, to be able to cram swaths of
loosely associated facts. I'd argue that it's a vital trade for study, but
perhaps it is less severe than only twenty years ago, because very powerful
memory aids have become ubiquitious.

> predict performance about equally well

having no tires or no engine predicts performance of a car--or rather the lack
thereof--equally well. Yet grip and horsepower are independent variables. I
think that means SAT scores don't predict success too well at all beyond a
certain threshold.

Having the right motivation (haha, a pun) for a certain disciplin might make a
huge difference. So you can test e.g. vocabulary learning in general, or
top9cal knowledge, which requires precise choices of vocabulary nonetheless,
but one not found in a general dictionary. It's more like knowing which
dictionaries exist, and what texts are referenced therein.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> I think that means SAT scores don't predict success too well at all beyond a
> certain threshold.

Try reading about it.

[https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Webb_RM_2001_Top.pdf](https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Webb_RM_2001_Top.pdf)

> There is another implication as a consequence of the statement "the
> influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the
> subject tests." That is, I first read tha[t] the students _don 't suffer
> under these conditions_.

This is not a valid inference to draw; the influence of test prep, cramming,
coaches, etc. is also minimal for the main SAT, but students suffer through
them anyway.

------
pulisse
A number of comments here seem to be confusing SAT subject tests, which are
domain-specific tests about subjects like biology, with the "standard" SAT.
It's only the former that MIT is dropping from consideration in admissions:

> We will continue to require the SAT or the ACT, because our research has
> shown these tests, in combination with a student’s high school grades and
> coursework, are predictive of success in our challenging curriculum.

------
jimbob45
Note to those who haven't been in high school for some time: these aren't the
main test. The main test still gets considered (in addition to your parents'
money)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_Subject_Tests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_Subject_Tests)

~~~
rickwierenga
> (in addition to your parents' money)

That is not true. MIT is need blind which means it doesn't consider financial
needs [1].

[1] [https://mitadmissions.org/afford/cost-aid-basics/access-
affo...](https://mitadmissions.org/afford/cost-aid-basics/access-
affordability/)

~~~
thedance
"As for the children of prominent campus donors, [former MIT director of
undergraduate admissions] Crowley said a college's development office might
reach out to the dean of admissions to say, "Hey, just so you know, Lisa's dad
has been very generous to us in the past, or something."

~~~
hksh
Since one isn't provided this is the top google result containing the quote
[1].

The context of the linked article is that Crowley now works for an admission
prep company IvyWise and this quote may not directly reference MIT but his
broader experience in this more recent role.

[1] [https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/college-cheating-
scanda...](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/college-cheating-scandal-two-
ex-admissions-officers-explain-behind-scenes-n983796)

------
chad_strategic
I'm sure that I will get in trouble for this but...

The SAT/ACT system is corrupt. It's plain an simple. Follow the money. It's as
simple as that. The root of most issues involve simple economics. (Maybe a
little broad of a statement, so take it with a grain of salt, but certainly
applies in this case.)

The tests are built on revenue from the taking the tests and industry selling
you prep material. I don't have time to find the article but the SAT
organization got busted a while back for charging different prices for
different zip codes.

Although I can't prove it, but I'm sure there were kickback for universities
that used the tests. It's a little unsubstantiated claim but we already know
you can bribe your way into to school. (The Rick Singer debacle) Why wouldn't
these "Testing" companies be doing the same.

Memorizing a method/strategy to take test is a waste of time and national
resources.

~~~
totalZero
How can you be sure of something that you cannot prove?

~~~
chad_strategic
I said I couldn't prove it.

If I was an investigative journalist and or I had significant amount of time,
then I would look into it.

~~~
totalZero
"...I can't prove it, but I'm sure..."

You said you can't prove it AND that you're sure.

This is not a good way to think.

In the words of Mark Twain, “It’s not what we don’t know that gets us in
trouble. It’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.”

~~~
chad_strategic
Well anybody that quotes Mark Twain, wins the battle.

But I will politely quote Ben Folds Five:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y1wm7CFRCQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y1wm7CFRCQ)

Some cherry pop music for these crazy times.

------
hhs
Earlier this year, Caltech made the decision to eliminate the SAT subject
tests: [https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/caltech-eliminate-
require...](https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/caltech-eliminate-requirement-
sat-subject-test-scores-admissions)

------
legionof7
Slightly unrelated but could be useful to any HS seniors here: My n=1 study
method got me a 1520. I would study for the SAT in a dark room, with horror
movie music or war sound effects playing in earbuds, while planking. For every
incorrect answer, I'd do 10 pushups or 3 pull-ups (can adapt to your own
level). Rationale was that if I could do well in the worst conditions
possible, then I'd do better sitting in a quiet room.

I'm a pretty bad student also, I had like a 3 GPA.

------
dbcurtis
"And last, but certainly not least: I know we are making this announcement
during the COVID-19 pandemic. We had already been planning to make this
change, and decided to announce as soon as possible in part because we wanted
to make sure no one was spending more time or energy studying for tests they
wouldn’t have to take for us, especially during a public health emergency. "

Riiiiiiiight. 'Cuz nobody that applies to MIT ever applies to a back-up
school. You know, just in case they don't get accepted. I've heard that can
happen.

~~~
alexhutcheson
SAT Subject Tests are either optional or not considered at most schools. I
personally took a few SAT Subject Tests that were only required for a single
school I was applying to.

------
kccqzy
The SAT subject tests just felt like a joke to me anyways. My high school was
a public high school in Singapore, a country generally considered to have
great education. With a generally good mastery of the normal high school
curriculum, these tests were considered very easy. Pretty much all my friends
and I got 800 out of 800 for all the subject tests. And these perfect scores
ended up not mattering that much in college admissions anyways.

The normal SAT I tests, on the other hand, seemed to require more critical
thinking, higher reading comprehension and reasoning skills, skills that are
sorely needed in an age of blatant misinformation. These are much harder to
score well, which is why so many people spend a lot studying for them. Not so
much for the SAT subject tests.

~~~
MiroF
It depends heavily on the SAT subject test. Math II, for instance, is heavily
curved and anyone with a solid understanding of high school math and their
calculator should have no problem getting an 800. But I'm not sure if the same
is true for all of the tests in the humanities and social sciences.

------
codelord
In my home country Iran we had the equivalent of SAT general and subject
tests. I did pretty poorly in general tests, but the subject tests saved me
(near perfect scores in physics and math) and opened the door for me to go to
a good university in my country. Just to get a clear understanding of my
financials, I was living off 1$ per month at that time which was just enough
to buy heavily subsidized food stamps in college. I ended up graduating with a
PhD degree and worked at several top companies in the US later. This seems to
me like a case of a cure that is worse than the disease.

------
chatmasta
To be fair, the SAT is pretty useless when you have enough applicants with 99
percentile scores that you can fill your class multiple times over. It was
never a differentiator.

------
supernova87a
If they ever extend this to the SAT / ACT itself (and not just the subject
tests) I will have lost a lot of respect for MIT.

A goal of higher education is to give the opportunity to people who will
likely make the best use of the education, and have the greatest chance of
succeeding given their preparation. Spots at top colleges are a _limited
resource_. There has to be a selection function, and an unbiased test that
asks questions about math, reading comprehension, etc. is as close as you're
going to get.

The SAT, regardless of your opinion of whether it exacerbates or merely
reflects inequities in the system, is a very strong indicator of whether a
person has the preparation to succeed at university. You cannot get around
that fact.

Whether high-priced prep courses or studying out of a book from the library
help you pass the test, the person doing either of those things has gotten
education and skills along the way. God forbid you consider the idea that
someone actually learned something even though the test was standardized. And
the fact that even poor families will pay to put their kids through test prep
courses suggests they see value in it. It's not like they're paying to be
given instructions on how to cheat the system.

People who want to water down the admissions criteria to be a social equalizer
ought not mask their motives by saying that the test is flawed. The test is
perfectly fine, and it reflects people's preparation and abilities to succeed
at university. If you want to change the outcome, change the inputs -- and
work on getting more people qualified to pass that test.

------
dntbnmpls
Everyone here claiming that SATs aren't fair don't seem to realize that SATs
are the most fair and most objective criteria in college admissions. It's not
perfect but it's the best and only objective measure we have.

GPA is far worse than SATs because not only are each high schools grading
standards different, each teacher's grading policy is different. There are
plenty of dumb 4.0s out there but there aren't that many dumb 1600s.

Extra-curricular is more unfair than SATs because you generally need time and
money and parental involvement for rowing classes.

Interviews are worse because it's a lot more about how the interviewer likes
and relates to you.

Of course the most unfair part is legacy admissions which nobody wants to get
rid of.

Sure, SATs aren't perfect, but it is the best and most objective measure we
have. It's actually the only tool we have to objectively measure and expose
racial discrimination in admissions policy. Now, people are fighting against
SATs. The only reason I can come up with is that these universities want to
participate in racial discrimination.

SATs, GPAs, Extra-curriculur, interview, etc should all be part of a student's
portfolio for admissions. That universities want to remove the ONLY, though
not perfect, objective measure is worrisome.

------
codingslave
Most of this is to obscure their admission criteria. Harvard has come under
fire for actively discriminating against Asian applicants. By removing a
standard test, these colleges can actively discriminate whilst making it more
difficult to prove admissions bias from a numerical and arguably more
objective standard.

~~~
krastanov
They are removing the extra optional tests, not the main SAT test. Sounds
great to me, as these extra tests just show you have the money to take them.
Your comment is an unfounded opinion, please do not present it with the
certainty of a fact.

~~~
gnicholas
The SAT IIs are not extra/optional if you're applying to most selective
colleges/universities. They aren't the main SAT, but they are far from
optional for students who would be considering MIT.

------
xibalba
The majority of comments in this thread are an abject demonstration of a
failure in reading comprehension.

If only we had a test for that...

------
jkaptur
These are the tests that are no longer being considered:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_Subject_Tests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_Subject_Tests).
They are not "the SAT".

It makes intuitive sense to me that MIT wouldn't find these useful. They test
subjects that students study in school. They're tests of knowledge, and have
multiple choice questions like "One purpose of the Marshall Plan of 1948 was
to..."

As far as I know, everyone's score on these tests correlated extremely well
with 1) their school grade in the relevant course 2) the relevant Advanced
Placement test.

------
abhisuri97
Honestly welcome change. The SAT Subject tests (at least for people around me
in HS) were always considered as a much easier test you'd take after the AP
for that very same subject. I just equated it to another way for collegeboard
to get money especially since the questions were way more straightforward than
AP. I am slightly concerned about what this means for schools where AP classes
are not offered (I imagine SAT Subject tests presented the most accessible
opportunity for these students to demonstrate their aptitude in a subject).

EDIT: changed wording in response to child comment.

~~~
mattmcknight
You can take the AP test without taking an AP course.

~~~
abhisuri97
Yep! But there are a few more barriers in the way if your school does not
offer AP courses (you'd need to find neighboring schools that do allow it and
talk to the AP coordinator at that school). For subject tests, there are
pretty minimal barriers associated with signing up. You just register as you
normally would for an SAT exam IIRC.

------
jimmyvalmer
These were called "Achievement Tests" in the early 90s, and man, they were
much harder than the SAT. If the current "Subject Tests" approximate their
level of difficulty, then it's a clear mistake for MIT to disregard these
datapoints. When I was applying to college, yes, people paid for SAT prep but
very few paid for Achievement Test prep, and so Achievement Tests were a
superior indicator.

~~~
pulisse
> These were called "Achievement Tests" in the early 90s, and man, they were
> much harder than the SAT. If the current "Subject Tests" approximate their
> level of difficulty, then it's a clear mistake for MIT to disregard these
> datapoints

Difficulty as perceived by test takers is irrelevant. What MIT cares about is
how well test performance predicts undergrad performance. As TFA notes, MIT is
retaining the standard SAT because their data indicates that performance on
that test _is_ predictive.

~~~
jimmyvalmer
We don't disagree. I remain dubious that excluding a subject test term
wouldn't deteriorate MIT's scoring model.

------
totalZero
This is a bad decision.

Subject tests helped me get into MIT from a public school in one of the states
in the bottom 5 for education spending.

Take away the tests, and you take away the merit.

------
gumby
Is SAT prep known to make any difference?

Back when I applied to MIT (early 80s) our entire SAT prep was "fill in the
circles completely, bring only #2 pencils to the test and if you can't
eliminate even one possible answer skip the question." Back then I never heard
of anyone using any more advice than just that.

A few years ago I bought some SAT prep books for my kid and he never cracked
them.

~~~
foreigner
Practice definitely helped me.

------
basementcat
Makes sense; doesn't everybody pretty much get perfect scores on these? (at
least everyone who is a serious applicant to an institution like MIT) If
everyone gets the same (perfect) score then the test doesn't really help the
admissions committee select for the best applicants. Tests like AMC 12 may be
more useful for this type of purpose.

~~~
applecrazy
Yep. SAT Math II is all but worthless at this point. The middle 50% for top
universities ranges from 800-800 (aka the max score).

------
joshvm
Oxford also tried something similar by implementing their own entrance tests
for engineering and physics (and other subjects). The idea was to stop private
school kids with straight A GCSEs and A-levels from dominating. The entrance
tests are supposed to be harder to prepare for, and therefore fairer - all
that did was force the rich kids to get tutors and the situation remains
largely the same.

One of the main reasons I didn't apply to the US for grad school is having to
sit through the GRE (which I had no time to prepare for during my final year)
and then to redo all my Masters courses because the US doesn't recognise
foreign qualifications. Virtually anywhere else in the world you can convert
your grades to local standard, and a masters is a masters. At grad level an
interview is much more useful to gauge ability, as grades are a poor predictor
of research output.

------
httpz
To clarify, SAT subject tests are the ones like physics, chemistry, Spanish,
etc. Not the main verbal and math portion. For students smart enough to get
into MIT, the subject tests are way too easy. Most students applying to MIT
probably have near perfect score already, so for MIT it's probably not a
useful indicator.

------
LatteLazy
When I was at university, the head of admissions position at the school of
physics was forced on someone who didn't want it. So he used it as an
opportunity for an experiment.

He offered a place to everyone who applied. People with low grades, people
without the maths prerequisite, anyone really.

Our intake swelled from about 60 students to almost 100. The ones without
maths really struggled. Many dropped out.

But to him that was the whole point: if you're smart/hungry/hardworking enough
to pass you'd pass. If you weren't, you'd drop out or fail. Either way, why
should he try to "pick winners"? This way winners without math prereq (or
whatever) still hey a chance.

That changed the way I thought about admissions as 2 of the extra 30 got a
degree they never gave had a chance at otherwise.

------
forkexec
I'm glad I didn't study at all or have any coaching for the 1600 pt SAT I in
the mid 90's because it would've been entirely unnecessary. I missed one
question on the math section and it was a dumb mistake on my part. Our
school's graduating class alone had over a dozen perfect SATs, multiple full
rides to Harvard/MIT/Stanford and around 70 over 1500. ~97% had test prep.

Now go to India, take the JEE and find out how fun testing can be because the
SAT is not much harder than a driving test. :) (Emphasis on the JEE being a
much better measure because it's more difficult and more voluminous so that it
would make Einstein feel insecure and inadequate.)

------
zaptheimpaler
A comment section of people who didn't read the article lol. They explicitly
said they consider SAT to be a predictive metric of success at MIT. This is
not critical of SAT, only SAT subject tests.

While they weren't explicit about why SAT subject tests won't be accepted,
this may be a clue:

> No: in fairness to all applicants, we won’t consider them for anyone. We
> think it would be unfair to consider scores only from those who have scored
> well and therefore choose to send them to us.

Seems reasonable to expect tests which are optional to suffer from heavy
selection bias as they described. I'd expect optional tests to also skew
towards the rich because there is a cost to each test.

~~~
adchari
Cost for tests can be waived using exam vouchers, even for the subject tests.
I think the actual factor would be preparation time/cost of other resources,
which can be either really small or thousands of dollars for a test prep
course.

------
crazygringo
Oh... this actually makes sense. MIT is still accepting the main SAT test
_and_ AP tests.

SAT subject tests were always a weird thing in the middle. AP tests cover the
same goal, but with more rigor and differentiation. (I remember taking the SAT
subject tests just to "cover my bases", because they were there, not because
there seemed to be any real reason.)

Also -- remember, even if your high school doesn't offer AP courses, you can
still study for and take the AP tests on your own.

------
pcvarmint
It was over 35 years ago, so it has absolutely no influence on me anymore, but
I achieved a perfect 800 on the SAT math achievement test, along with a 5 on
the Calculus BC.

But on the regular SAT, I only achieved around 1300 total, and the math part
was somewhere between 780-800 (did I have a bad day?).

I never completed college, but I have been successful nonetheless.

I think that there is more to one's ability than simply achievement test
scores, grade point averages, or college degrees.

------
noodlesUK
Is there some other standardised exam (AP? IB?) that they will be considering
instead? I went through a very non-traditional route to university, and
standardised exams were an important part of me being able to demonstrate
preparedness for university. I hesitate to just go on what grades someone gets
at school, as it simply puts them at the mercy of their teachers and
administrators, and some people like me didn’t really go to school...

------
HarryHirsch
It isn't exactly a surprise. Back then, in school, we toured the national
synchrotron facility, and the same question came up: if didn't have much
physics at school can you still study physics? The answer was: if you study
physics they'll teach you physics just fine, where you'll run into trouble is
the adjacent subjects, chemistry, biology, computing. You'll need to take care
of that yourself.

------
johnmarcus
>For all applicants: We require the SAT or the ACT. We do not require the ACT
writing section or the SAT optional essay. > we still require the score
because it is predictive in conjunction with other acedemic factors

So.....basically nothing has changed and the headline is extremely misleading.

Edit: so apparently this applies to the "subject" tests. I never took those
and didn't know they were a thing, now I do.

------
makstaks
To clarify, SATs are still required, subject tests are different.

From page:

"Will you still require the SAT or the ACT?"

"We will continue to require the SAT or the ACT, because..."

edited: formatting

------
sriram_sun
> "... for non-native English speakers, we strongly recommend taking the TOEFL
> if you have been using English for less than 5 years or do not speak English
> at home or in school..."

I hope that TOEFL is offered on a pass/fail criteria. For. e.g. if you score
(say) 85% or more, it shouldn't matter if you score 100% for purposes or
communication or comprehension.

~~~
thedance
The only criteria for English should be abilities at least as good as the
worst teaching assistant in the undergraduate college. This is the lowest
possible standard of English language proficiency.

""" WHEN Mark W. Eichin showed up for his course in differential equations at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology this year, he found that his
instructor was a Hindustani whose spoken English was ''almost
incomprehensible.'' Along with most of his classmates, the freshman stopped
attending lectures. ''People just got their assignments and left,'' he
recalled. """

^ Consistent with my own undergrad experience.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Wouldn't demanding English language abilities help to reduce instances of this
in the future? Like if they're letting students graduate with language
deficits then the chance of tutors/teachers/professors having less language
ability than desirable would seem to go up?

~~~
adchari
The University of Illinois requires TOEFL and in person English language
interviews before a TA or professor from a foreign country is allowed to teach
any section. Students still face similar issues, due to accents and the fact
that fluency in a language guarantees that you can convey an idea, not that
you can engage listeners and use idioms which translate well.

------
luord
I'm sure this is for the sake of "diversity" yet this only harms those kids
who can't do any extracurricular activities or similar and had to rely on
standardized tests to have a chance. I should know, I was one of them.

So this can only backfire (if the goal really is to get more people from
different backgrounds in), as these initiatives always do.

------
jacobmiske
I am a class of 2020 MIT student. Taking these tests was sort of awkward in my
case. My high school allowed me to take the ACT once for free. I did not have
to take SAT Subject Tests for any of my other college applications. I am happy
with Stu's decision here. I can speak more on my experience if people would
like me to do so.

------
grantsch
Nearly none of the comments are really about what they're eliminating: SAT
subject tests (NOT the SAT!)

The main SAT is basically a basic skills and IQ test while the SUBJECT tests
are almost entirely about preparation, making them much easier to game/prepare
for.

Source: I tutored the SAT and subject tests.

------
kovac
I did poorly for SAT general ability test. But was at the top most percentile
(I can't remember the exact number here, long time back) in the subject tests
(I think I took Math and Physics). I wonder how that happened if both tests
predict performance equally well.

------
cwperkins
What about the College boards initiative to consider adversity? Has that
initiative gone anywhere or is it dead? I would rather consider adversity of a
child's upbringing in context of standardized test results then any immutable
traits.

------
larrik
Title nitpick, "SAT Subject Tests" is in a specific case in the original
title, and the lack of title-case on "Subject Tests" is making it hard to
understand the true announcement.

IE. SATs are staying, SAT Subject Tests are not.

------
ismail-khan
What’s the point of the subject tests anyway when you already have AP exams?

It was pointless for me to do both in high school, the subject tests were much
easier.

------
jwilber
Another item on the list of recent things MIT has done/participated in to
reduce its reputation in favor of pleasing the rich and powerful.

------
chottocharaii
I took the SAT from Australia and was blown away by how ridiculously easy it
was.

Maybe it’d be a better predictor of ability if they made it a bit harder.

~~~
MiroF
What's easy for you is not easy for everyone. It currently is a pretty good
predictor of ability in college.

------
shiado
"Any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is
placed upon it for control purposes."

------
cosmotic
The post is a little misleading. MIT will still require SAT or ACT, just not
the subject tests.

~~~
bryanhpchiang
That's exactly what the headline says.

~~~
kart23
So you still have to submit it, but they won't consider it? I'm confused.

------
hnburnsy
Does MIT ask for AMC/AIME scores which are miles above the SAT Math Subject
tests?

~~~
chapplap
Yes, they are accepted on the application. Many of the undergrads at MIT
qualified for the AIME. A substantial number qualified for the USAMO or IMO as
well - just look at the Putnam results every year.

Frankly, in order to stand out among MIT applicants by demonstrating some sort
of mathematical ability on these exams, the minimum is probably USAMO
qualification (top 270 of ~200k AMC takers). Otherwise it's a nice thing to
have but not particularly unique. Even then I know a reasonable number of
USAMO qualifiers who have been rejected.

Source: was a MIT undergrad < 5 years ago

------
djohnston
Wow I totally forgot about these. I can't even remember which one's I took!

------
throwawaysea
I am always wary of universities removing testing requirements as they are
usually motivated by activist pressure (vilifying meritocracy and pushing for
equity, AKA equality of outcomes) rather than evaluating for the best talent
more precisely. Anyone know more about what the story is behind this one?

------
mac01021
What fraction of applicants were taking the subject tests in the first place?

------
Koshkin
I wonder if this has something to do with the pandemic.

------
farrarstan
Itt: hackernews.txt

------
vondur
Ah man, 20 years too late for me!

------
awinter-py
boolean satisfiability?

------
pelasaco
The only question that now matters: Do you like Trump? if yes, you are out.

------
0xff00ffee
34 years too goddamn late for me. Yes I'm still angry I didn't get in, because
my SATs sucked. Now I run a software company. EAT IT MIT! :)

------
better0uts1d3
Sometimes, there's good news from coronavirus

------
thecleaner
So they will consider what ? Recommendation letters ? Maybe they dont realise
that people from disadvantaged groups dont really have the luxury to volunteer
at one of those fancy NGOs. Standardized tests are actually except for the
super expensive textbooks in the US. If these books for basic education could
somehow be made free but oh wait - socialism.

~~~
gwbas1c
> So they will consider what?

They explain it very clearly: The SAT or ACT, and high school grades.

They are just skipping the _subject_ _tests_ , because they don't think they
are useful.

The subject tests are the optional tests that students can take in addition to
the normal SAT.

------
thatiscool
I can project the going south of MIT.

~~~
Koshkin
BU?

