Why People Are Freaking Out About Jeffree Star, Cadesha Bishop, & The SAT Adversity Score Explained
video description
Date: 2019-11-01
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 9
1337GameDev
The adversity score is not a good idea. While I could have benefited from it, I really don't like it. It makes it so that people who come from worse off locations, don't have to work as hard (with the assumption that it's hard for them to reach the level of higher socio-economic people) and makes the more well off person worse because more is expected of them. This is ESPECIALLY bad because the score is HIDDEN from the student. The SAT should have 2 scores, how you rank (current score, AND how you rank based on people deemed similar to you based on socio economic factors, so it shows how WELL you did, given what you had, NOT abstracting it away and saying you did the same as somebody more well off. Plus, diversification is in fact discrimination. I 100% didn't get scholarships, help from programs, benefits of the doubt, etc when in school, due to me being white / middle class, and now i'm stuck with 48k left to pay on student loans. I scored reasonably low on the SAT (but that doesn't mean i was dumb, as my local school had minimal funding, and the teachers did the best they could with money/time they had. Should I be weighed less, just because I was more well off, and didn't score higher? Any diversity quota, instead of merit based acceptance, is 100% discrimination. Should we recognize discriminatory practices and avoid them? yup. always. BUT, when there is a race, and certain groups routinely get left behind, we shouldn't move the finish line closer FOR THEM, and keep it the same for others. That'll only encourage stigma, because then people will say Well, your Asian, and didn't get accepted, so you must have been horrible or well, you only got accepted because your Mexican, if you were Asian / in the middle class, you wouldn't have been accepted, and with these new scores, this would have been true. This is discrimination. 100%. Is it racist if African Americans/blacks make up a large percentage of basketball and football players? Nope. they tend to have qualities that are better suited, and hence perform better. If other groups want to compete, they need to overcome that, and if they can't, there's not much that can be done, besides choosing the not as optimal pick, for the sake of feelings.
reply
The adversity score is not a good idea. While I could have benefited from it, I really don't like it. It makes it so that people who come from worse off locations, don't have to work as hard (with the assumption that it's hard for them to reach the level of higher socio-economic people) and makes the more well off person worse because more is expected of them. This is ESPECIALLY bad because the score is HIDDEN from the student. The SAT should have 2 scores, how you rank (current score, AND how you rank based on people deemed similar to you based on socio economic factors, so it shows how WELL you did, given what you had, NOT abstracting it away and saying you did the same as somebody more well off. Plus, diversification is in fact discrimination. I 100% didn't get scholarships, help from programs, benefits of the doubt, etc when in school, due to me being white / middle class, and now i'm stuck with 48k left to pay on student loans. I scored reasonably low on the SAT (but that doesn't mean i was dumb, as my local school had minimal funding, and the teachers did the best they could with money/time they had. Should I be weighed less, just because I was more well off, and didn't score higher? Any diversity quota, instead of merit based acceptance, is 100% discrimination. Should we recognize discriminatory practices and avoid them? yup. always. BUT, when there is a race, and certain groups routinely get left behind, we shouldn't move the finish line closer FOR THEM, and keep it the same for others. That'll only encourage stigma, because then people will say Well, your Asian, and didn't get accepted, so you must have been horrible or well, you only got accepted because your Mexican, if you were Asian / in the middle class, you wouldn't have been accepted, and with these new scores, this would have been true. This is discrimination. 100%. Is it racist if African Americans/blacks make up a large percentage of basketball and football players? Nope. they tend to have qualities that are better suited, and hence perform better. If other groups want to compete, they need to overcome that, and if they can't, there's not much that can be done, besides choosing the not as optimal pick, for the sake of feelings.
reply
Cody Charpentier
The adversity score is a step in the right direction. Race-based discrimination is not a good thing. It's how you end up with people like that child of a multi-millionaire at Mizzou telling white students how privileged they are. People who say it matters where you are now are the exact people Dr. King wrote about in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Here is the quote: First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a more convenient season. Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. People who want disadvantaged people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps are the moderates that give rise to fascism. They are the defenders of the status quo and the greatest perpetrators of inequity and inequality our society produces because unlike the bigots and elitists their argument of just not right now can sway the minds of people to continue the cycle of inequality that keeps the majority of people in our nation down.
reply
The adversity score is a step in the right direction. Race-based discrimination is not a good thing. It's how you end up with people like that child of a multi-millionaire at Mizzou telling white students how privileged they are. People who say it matters where you are now are the exact people Dr. King wrote about in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Here is the quote: First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a more convenient season. Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. People who want disadvantaged people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps are the moderates that give rise to fascism. They are the defenders of the status quo and the greatest perpetrators of inequity and inequality our society produces because unlike the bigots and elitists their argument of just not right now can sway the minds of people to continue the cycle of inequality that keeps the majority of people in our nation down.
reply
Omar Infante-Ramos
So here's the tea, as a brown skinned Latino who fluctuated between poor and lower middle class growing up, my experience has been that income inequality affects people of all races. Black, latino, asian, white. doesn't matter. Not having the resources and support that you need while growing up is going to adversely affect your educational experience. Period. So I think it's a better idea to look at these factors rather than just the race of someone. But I also think that you should look at the economic factors that affected a student from Pre-K to present, because I've also seen situations where kids who were weighed down all of their lives by income disparity but their parents were finally able to reach a certain level of success towards the end be ROYALLY SCREWED. That sudden level of success doesn't wipe away years of hardship and setbacks a kid may have faced. Also, countless studies show that the early childhood years can be a huge determining factor for how successful a person will be as an adult. I've also read about programs that can help adults who missed out on some crucial early childhood education catch-up in a way by being trained in the soft skills that they may have missed out on when they were young. This can vastly improve their lives going forward. I think colleges should test everyone for these soft skills and provide that level of training for all incoming students who score below a certain level to help ensure their student's success both in school and their future career.
reply
So here's the tea, as a brown skinned Latino who fluctuated between poor and lower middle class growing up, my experience has been that income inequality affects people of all races. Black, latino, asian, white. doesn't matter. Not having the resources and support that you need while growing up is going to adversely affect your educational experience. Period. So I think it's a better idea to look at these factors rather than just the race of someone. But I also think that you should look at the economic factors that affected a student from Pre-K to present, because I've also seen situations where kids who were weighed down all of their lives by income disparity but their parents were finally able to reach a certain level of success towards the end be ROYALLY SCREWED. That sudden level of success doesn't wipe away years of hardship and setbacks a kid may have faced. Also, countless studies show that the early childhood years can be a huge determining factor for how successful a person will be as an adult. I've also read about programs that can help adults who missed out on some crucial early childhood education catch-up in a way by being trained in the soft skills that they may have missed out on when they were young. This can vastly improve their lives going forward. I think colleges should test everyone for these soft skills and provide that level of training for all incoming students who score below a certain level to help ensure their student's success both in school and their future career.
reply
OhHiItsConnor
As far as the SAT Adversity Score, whether or not you like it, it's at least a step in the right direction. The United States objectively has a racist history, from slavery, to Jim Crow laws, segregation, and so on. In the last half century we've managed to get so far as to elect an African American President, so clearly there's been amazing progress to the point where we can move past solely focusing on race. Affirmative Action as a concept to help those in poverty is nice I suppose, but how can we actually move forward without constantly focusing on race? We can't. Some Black people are poor while others are rich. The same applies for Whites, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, men, women - you name it. I see the Adversity Score as a better, not perfect, way to further our focus on individual circumstances and socioeconomic status as opposed to refusing to let race go. It could be more specific for sure by focusing more on the individual and his/her particular obstacles, with more transparency of the determining factors being necessary as well. Overall, between the Adversity Score and race being the focus as it is in Affirmative Action, I definitely see this change as an improvement so long as the students are still meeting the school's minimum qualifications.
reply
As far as the SAT Adversity Score, whether or not you like it, it's at least a step in the right direction. The United States objectively has a racist history, from slavery, to Jim Crow laws, segregation, and so on. In the last half century we've managed to get so far as to elect an African American President, so clearly there's been amazing progress to the point where we can move past solely focusing on race. Affirmative Action as a concept to help those in poverty is nice I suppose, but how can we actually move forward without constantly focusing on race? We can't. Some Black people are poor while others are rich. The same applies for Whites, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, men, women - you name it. I see the Adversity Score as a better, not perfect, way to further our focus on individual circumstances and socioeconomic status as opposed to refusing to let race go. It could be more specific for sure by focusing more on the individual and his/her particular obstacles, with more transparency of the determining factors being necessary as well. Overall, between the Adversity Score and race being the focus as it is in Affirmative Action, I definitely see this change as an improvement so long as the students are still meeting the school's minimum qualifications.
reply
Satan Lover13
9: 56 this sounds, kind of idiotic. If someone hasn't had the education required to reach a certain level and the us government aka who ever is in charge of the corporation that oversees who gets in to thousands of for profit colleges wants to get lawsuit protection then that presents a clear target for scheming. If not, then u still have a qualification question, that's hundreds of more hours of catching up adding even more cost to the how damn thing. On top of that you're in essence talking about throwing the meaning of eduacation out for diversity, sorry half asked diversify measurements. If a Republican state teaches its kids that memorization is the way to go and they then get a boost for having a poor economy then that's not only a brain drain but also a sudden flood of unintelligent self important entitled idiots who think their the shit. No only will it be a major point of propaganda that white people are being undervalued furthering a nativist, racially white supremacist myth but also. Think about how this will effect households. A major push twards tudors, mostly white affluent kids. More of an obsession with scoring. Less of an enfesis on agile thinking. Wts.
reply
9: 56 this sounds, kind of idiotic. If someone hasn't had the education required to reach a certain level and the us government aka who ever is in charge of the corporation that oversees who gets in to thousands of for profit colleges wants to get lawsuit protection then that presents a clear target for scheming. If not, then u still have a qualification question, that's hundreds of more hours of catching up adding even more cost to the how damn thing. On top of that you're in essence talking about throwing the meaning of eduacation out for diversity, sorry half asked diversify measurements. If a Republican state teaches its kids that memorization is the way to go and they then get a boost for having a poor economy then that's not only a brain drain but also a sudden flood of unintelligent self important entitled idiots who think their the shit. No only will it be a major point of propaganda that white people are being undervalued furthering a nativist, racially white supremacist myth but also. Think about how this will effect households. A major push twards tudors, mostly white affluent kids. More of an obsession with scoring. Less of an enfesis on agile thinking. Wts.
reply
Hannah C
I don't really support affirmative action, but I think this is a better option. Race is definitely connected to socioeconomic class, but class is much more important to look at. I was not a good student in high school. I didn't care about my academics and I rarely went to class and instead of my teachers being supportive, some of them responded by telling me I wouldn't graduate or succeed in life (I had already gotten into college so I didn't care about my last semester of senior year. Fortunately for me, I am from a fairly well off and educated background. My mom is a professor at an Ivy League university so understands the education system and how to put together a high quality application, I went to a very good high school and was prepared well for college and which also helped me get a high SAT score and most importantly I have parents who care about my success. I think it's important to be proud of your accomplishments, but to take your privilege (though it's an overused word) into account. I don't know where I would be if I was from a different background. If I had teachers that insulted me, but without parents who supported me.
reply
I don't really support affirmative action, but I think this is a better option. Race is definitely connected to socioeconomic class, but class is much more important to look at. I was not a good student in high school. I didn't care about my academics and I rarely went to class and instead of my teachers being supportive, some of them responded by telling me I wouldn't graduate or succeed in life (I had already gotten into college so I didn't care about my last semester of senior year. Fortunately for me, I am from a fairly well off and educated background. My mom is a professor at an Ivy League university so understands the education system and how to put together a high quality application, I went to a very good high school and was prepared well for college and which also helped me get a high SAT score and most importantly I have parents who care about my success. I think it's important to be proud of your accomplishments, but to take your privilege (though it's an overused word) into account. I don't know where I would be if I was from a different background. If I had teachers that insulted me, but without parents who supported me.
reply
Crymsyn9000
That adversity score is a nice idea but not implemented correctly. I would score low just based on where I lived but I grew up working a bunch of part-time jobs as my father was sick and unable to keep a full-time job. My parents struggled just to keep us in the good neighborhood, so that I could have a decent education but I sure in fk couldn't afford tutors or extra help like many of my classmates. Most of my free time was spent working and not on extracurriculars. I did well in my classes because I wouldn't sleep all that much during the week and do my homework whenever I could fit it in (lunch break, breaks at work and etc. There were still times when I didn't even have enough money to buy lunch or to even bring anything with me to school (too many medical bills to pay some weeks. I used to pretend during those weeks that I was doing a tea cleanse and no one would question why I wasn't eating. I'm so happy that I finished my BSc way before all this shit started because I couldn't imagine applying to school and being told that I grew up privileged just based off of my neighborhood.
reply
That adversity score is a nice idea but not implemented correctly. I would score low just based on where I lived but I grew up working a bunch of part-time jobs as my father was sick and unable to keep a full-time job. My parents struggled just to keep us in the good neighborhood, so that I could have a decent education but I sure in fk couldn't afford tutors or extra help like many of my classmates. Most of my free time was spent working and not on extracurriculars. I did well in my classes because I wouldn't sleep all that much during the week and do my homework whenever I could fit it in (lunch break, breaks at work and etc. There were still times when I didn't even have enough money to buy lunch or to even bring anything with me to school (too many medical bills to pay some weeks. I used to pretend during those weeks that I was doing a tea cleanse and no one would question why I wasn't eating. I'm so happy that I finished my BSc way before all this shit started because I couldn't imagine applying to school and being told that I grew up privileged just based off of my neighborhood.
reply
Vudoodude
The good thing about the Adversity Score is that it works not only as an indicator of the difficulties poorer students had when growing up, but it is a great indicator of motivation and drive, things that are difficult to test for on SAT. People who can score well on the SAT and have a high adversity score shows that they not only live under disadvantaged circumstances but that they are willing to work hard and study to improve their circumstances. Of course, since this Adversity Score was designed with a specific demographic of people in mind, it is unfair for people that score well but come from a more affluent background. While a high Adversity Score may be an indicator of motivation and drive, a low Adversity Score SHOULD NOT be interpreted as a low motivation or drive. That is to say, just because a person comes from a more affluent background, people shouldn't undermine their scores or efforts, and unfortunately I think that's what this Adversity Score will do. People are going to see a low Adversity Score and automatically have a bias against those people.
reply
The good thing about the Adversity Score is that it works not only as an indicator of the difficulties poorer students had when growing up, but it is a great indicator of motivation and drive, things that are difficult to test for on SAT. People who can score well on the SAT and have a high adversity score shows that they not only live under disadvantaged circumstances but that they are willing to work hard and study to improve their circumstances. Of course, since this Adversity Score was designed with a specific demographic of people in mind, it is unfair for people that score well but come from a more affluent background. While a high Adversity Score may be an indicator of motivation and drive, a low Adversity Score SHOULD NOT be interpreted as a low motivation or drive. That is to say, just because a person comes from a more affluent background, people shouldn't undermine their scores or efforts, and unfortunately I think that's what this Adversity Score will do. People are going to see a low Adversity Score and automatically have a bias against those people.
reply
Tails Clock
The adversity rating sounds good as far as admissions and help go. Affirmative action is a disaster and needs scrapping. However none of this should ever get to effect your final scores. The entire point of grading is that everyone is reaching for the same bar. The moment you change what someone needs to get a certain score, it's not a test anymore. It becomes invalidated as usable information. I wish though we had more schools and colleges, as it seems the biggest problem is just not having enough room for everyone. The fact so much land is being used for utterly useless buildings, or even detrimental places to get mone out of people instead of helping others is sad. We dont have space for such a waste when every town needs two colleges and are lucky if they even get one. I think I might be saying I'm against private land ownership. That wasn't where I meant to go with this. Kinda shocked that's turned out to be related to education inequality.
reply
The adversity rating sounds good as far as admissions and help go. Affirmative action is a disaster and needs scrapping. However none of this should ever get to effect your final scores. The entire point of grading is that everyone is reaching for the same bar. The moment you change what someone needs to get a certain score, it's not a test anymore. It becomes invalidated as usable information. I wish though we had more schools and colleges, as it seems the biggest problem is just not having enough room for everyone. The fact so much land is being used for utterly useless buildings, or even detrimental places to get mone out of people instead of helping others is sad. We dont have space for such a waste when every town needs two colleges and are lucky if they even get one. I think I might be saying I'm against private land ownership. That wasn't where I meant to go with this. Kinda shocked that's turned out to be related to education inequality.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
14:23
19:58
13:47
14:24
17:20