The New York Times reported on the annual competition for admission to New York City’s most selective high schools, where about 26,000 eighth-grade students competed for some 4,000 openings. Admission is based on a single standardized test, offered only once. Although two-thirds of the city’s students are Black or Latino, about 10% of offers went to students from these groups. More than half the acceptance offers (53%) went to Asian-American students.
Admission to the selective high schools is considered a ticket to the best colleges (but students have to work hard in high school to earn that ticket).
It should be noted that New York City has dozens of excellent high schools that do not require students to take the Specialized High School Admissions Test that is required by the elite high schools.
Former Mayor Bill de Blasio tried to change the admissions criteria to increase the proportion of Black and Latino students to 40%, but any change in the testing requirement must be approved by the State Legislature. That body includes graduates of the elite schools, who protect the status quo. Also, Asian-Americans fiercely oppose any change in the admissions process. All proposals for change have failed.
At Stuyvesant High School in Manhattan, the most selective of the city’s so-called specialized schools, seven of the 762 offers made went to Black students, down from 11 last year and eight in 2021. Twenty Latino students were offered spots at Stuyvesant, as were 489 Asian students and 158 white students. The rest went to multiracial students and students whose race was unknown.
Gaps at many of the other schools were also stark: Out of 287 offers made at Staten Island Technical High School, for example, two Black students were accepted — up from zero last year — along with seven Latino students….
The schools also represent perhaps the highest-profile symbol of segregation across the system, where over the last decade, Black and Latino students have never received more than 12 percent of offers.
Decades ago, the specialized schools tended to serve much larger proportions of Black and Latino students. And a handful of elite schools, like the Brooklyn Latin School — where 73 Black and Latino teenagers were accepted in a class of 388 this year — are somewhat more reflective of the city’s demographics….
The Adams administration has not made school integration a top priority, quieting the public and political attention on the issue after years of intense fights.
The system’s chancellor, David C. Banks, has argued that many Black and Latino families care more about school quality than who their children’s classmates are.
He has aimed to overhaul how students are taught to read, and supported increasing seats in the city’s selective gifted and talented program for elementary students, reversing Mr. de Blasio’s plan to eliminate it.

Ah, it’s that time of year again. Everybody get out their annual statements!
LikeLike
The problem is the selective high schools existence. It’s a disturbing form of tracking. Just get rid of them.
LikeLike
A lot of progressives agree. Some also think selective admissions should be shut down at every other high schools in NYC. Presumably they don’t want a return to zoned high schools (I’ve never heard that proposed). If not, that would mean that the entire NYC high school system would be like a huge charter school system except publicly run—citywide lotteries but maybe with preferences for local residence.
LikeLike
“It should be noted that New York City has dozens of excellent high schools that do not require students to take the Specialized High School Admissions Test that is required by the elite high schools.”
Then please explain further– Are they excellent but not AS excellent as the “Specialized High Schools?” Are they ACTUALLY equal in quality but not RECOGNIZED so by parents? If so, by what measure are they judged to be equal?
And regarding these disproportional admissions–is racism from administrators and parents a factor? Differences in the quality of schools attended prior to high school?
LikeLike
Under Bloomberg, every high school became a school of choice. Zoned high schools were closed. Large high schools were replaced by small high schols, most with themes (the High School of the Violin, the High School of Writing, the High School of Social Justice, etc.). There are now hundreds of high schools. Many are selective, which is to be expected when there are more applicants than spaces. A professor at Columbia University adapted the medical school admission process to match students and schools. Students list their top 12 choices. Schools pick the ones they want. Most kids get into a school on their list. Some get none of their 12 choices. Students often travel an hour or more to get to their high school. The “best” schools, eg, Beacon, Murrow, Midwood are in great demand.
LikeLike
One reason Asian students score higher is that many parents can afford to spend thousands of dollars on test prep, and it is a cultural value to do so. One flaw in selecting students on the basis of a single test is that standardized tests can be gamed. Lots of exposure to sample tests and questions can give student a distinct advantage. In the greater NYC area there is veritable cottage industry of test preppers that serve Asian families. I’ve met a few people that supplement their income tutoring Asian students.
LikeLike
My son learned more math from studying for the SHSAT than he did in school. That learning was “gaming.”
LikeLike
“Decades ago, the specialized schools tended to serve much larger proportions of Black and Latino students.”
Why? I am unable to read the NY TIMES article because I am not a subscriber.
LikeLike
Several possible reasons. This was in the 70s and 80s, if I recall correctly. Sorry that this is cursory and a bit sloppy, I haven’t thought about this much in the last few years.
Some say it’s because there was more of a gifted and talented pipeline for those students.
at that time there were still a fair number of very large high schools (most were broken apart over the following decades) that were seen as outstanding places to send smart middle class kids. As a consequence, there was less competition for specialized high schools.
At the same time, Brooklyn Tech was not considered nearly as prestigious as it is today. Remember this was a time of “white flight” from the city.
probably the biggest difference: the Asian student population was much much lower back in the 70s and 80s. Now it’s equal to or higher than the percentage of white students in the school system.
LikeLike
And here is where I remember that bullet points don’t render in WordPress.
LikeLike
“Some say it’s because there was more of a gifted and talented pipeline for those students.”
This makes very good sense to me. I have often expressed my dismay that most schools do not make such hands-on exploratory classes available for ALL students.
I have provided such courses after school during my 16 years in Title One K-8 schools. I was only paid for that extra work during two of those years, when our school received a grant, but the work was a pleasure and easy for me as an older teacher with adult children, AND no “standards” or lesson plans requiring cover-your-a__ documentation.
These included woodworking, bookbinding, art, music, microscopy, science, and gardening.
Other teachers and parents have done the same after school, and I have observed that some teachers in the classroom are–by nature or intention–more “hands-on” than others in bringing the curriculum to life.
LikeLike
My daughter went to Stuyvesant.
Frankly the SHSAT schools are very overrated. The most prestigious ones are absolutely massive and students are largely left to fend for themselves. The teachers aren’t any better than they are at other top non-specialized schools—there are some fantastic teachers and some terrible teachers, like everywhere else. There is some name brand clout associated with Stuyvesant and Bronx Science, but not enough to get white or Asian students into Ivy League (or equivalent) schools unless they perform extremely well, which is not easy to do when your cohort is as smart as they are at these schools. And even then it’s often not enough.
People obsess about these schools because everybody keeps repeating the word “elite” over and over. They are great schools but there are a lot of great schools. But because so few black students are admitted, and especially since Asians started completely dominating Stuy and Bronx Science, a lot of people want to smash them.
In my humble view, there is nothing wrong with having a difficult test that identifies a group of advanced learners for admission to a few specialized schools established for that purpose. And I don’t care what the demographics of the school look like. If they end up 90% Asian, fine by me.
LikeLike
FLERP,
I pointed out that there are many excellent high schools in NYC that do not require the SHSAT. I know students who dropped out of Bronx Science. Too many students, too much anonymity. It was a bad fit for her.
LikeLike
Changing admissions from something other than SHSAT only is NOT “smashing” the specialized high schools.
LikeLike
Why don’t you make the same argument about Sports? They are mostly black and Latino. Should we change it to include more Asian students?
LikeLike
In 2022, 60.5% of male student college athletes in the United States were white, while 17.9% were African American. 60.4% of white high-school students have participated in sports, compared to 42.1% of black students, 46.9% of Hispanic students, and 51.4% of Hispanic non-Asian students. So, there’s some disparity there. The low black participation rate in high-school is probably related to socio-economic status. High-school sports are expensive.
Asian American athletes make up less than 1% of NCAA athletes in sports such as basketball and baseball, but they are 10.5% of players in women’s Division 1 golf and 14.6% in men’s fencing.
Asians make up about 7 percent of the U.S. population.
LikeLike
No figures for participation in curling, luge, and caber tossing.
LikeLike
One nit on the title of this post, Diane. It should say “specialized” high schools, not “selective.” There are about a hundred high schools in NYC that use selective admissions and Asian Americans don’t dominate those overall.
LikeLike
“The system’s chancellor, David C. Banks, has ….. supported increasing seats in the city’s selective gifted and talented program for elementary students,”
How? With what results? AND, will we still be waiting two decades from now, like with the Campaign for Fiscal Equity?
Seems perfectly logical to me that among the masses of anti public school far-right zealots, traitors and religious dictators are some parents seeking charter schools because all they’ve gotten is promises, promises, promises–as students and now as parents.
LikeLike
Rather than decrying the academic success of Asian-American students at both the high school and university level, why not applaud them for providing the roadmap to the most selective schools, for anyone willing to prioritize the value of education.
LikeLike
Good point, except there appear to be limited openings at the selective schools.
LikeLike
[Clap emoji]
LikeLike
Agreed
LikeLike
There are two cultures/ethnic/religious groups that I’m aware of with thousands of years of history that reveals education is extremely important and that begins in the home before a child is born.
Chinese
Jewish
Anchee was born in China during Mao’s cultural revolution and left China in the 1980s to the US on a student visa. When she was pregnant with her daughter, who was born in Chicago, she started saving for her daughter’s college. The Han Dynasty implemented high stakes Standardized tests before Jesus Christ was born and tests like that have stayed part of China’s civilization for more than 2,000 years and counting.
Lauryann graduated from high school with a 4.4 GPA as a scholar athlete and was accepted to Stanford where she graduated four years later, and her mother Anchee paid for all of it. No need for taking out student loans.
For Lauryann, her K-12 education and Stanford were jobs, not a distraction from video games, hanging out with friends, or watching too much TV.
A major focus in the home was on Lauryann’s education starting before kindergarten. There was no TV or computer linked to the internet in her room. There were no video games. We took her to the library once a week to check out books because that was what she could do when she had down time, read. Before she was in high school, she’d read the entire Lord of the Rings tribology several times, her favorite passages repeatedly.
We also limited TV to family time only Friday and Saturday for an hour or t2o. The TV was off the rest of the week. If I wanted to read the news, i did that when I was logged on to the internet. We had one computer linked to the internet and it was downstairs as far from Lauryann’s bedroom as possible.
When Anchee’s sister, relatives visited us or we visited her in San Francisco or family and friends in China, the major topic of conversation was always about the education of their children, not fashions or TV shows, political crap, or the latest gossip. The children would be the center of attention showing us what they were learning: piano, violin, ballet, et al. As a child, Lauryann focused on gymnastics and ballet attending gymnastic and ballet classes on a regular basis and being involved on stage in competitions. In high school she became a pole vaulter and broke her high school record twice putting her in the top ten in the state for her age/grade.
Anchee’s sister has two sons. One went to Stanford. The other to UC Berkeley. The parents paid for all their college educations.
LikeLike
No doubt Lloyd the Young lady is an over achiever who has worked very hard and you both steered her toward those goals. Of course you are leaving a few things out of the story that are relevant to this post.
Anchee left China on a Student Visa and” when her family visits education of the children is the center of the conversation”.
Would it be presumptuous of me to say that her family in China was middle or even upper middle class. Which enabled her to be a foriegn student in the US in 1980. It is noteworthy that roughly 60% of China’s population is rural and relatively poor. If you substitute select College for select HS we could be talking about how few rural Chinese attend more than the equivalent of a vocational community college today. A far more unequal situation today than in the 50s when Mao was in power.
Enough has been written on the subject. Tom Loveless has written extensively about the pitfalls of China’s education system and the “Shanghai PISA miracle” that sends migrant students back to HS in their villages.
I would assume that with her GPA and activities Lauryann had substantial financial incentives from Stanford. But in any event with tuition at 56 k a year, most American Families could not afford to pay the Tuition with or without scholarship dollars. Which leads to the fact that Anchee herself probably did very well financially after school . Which again is not the case for 65% of families who make under 100k a year in the USA. On Long Island that might be the poverty line (lol). Certainly not enough to pay off 220k of Tuition plus living costs.
To not compete with NYCPSP for lengthiness I will sum this part up by saying you are leaving out the Economic dynamic of the home Lauryann grew up in. With two highly educated parents of substantial means,backgrounds and the time to devote to assisting her. Putting her on the path she and you chose. She did not decide as a young child to crack the books and lock off the TV. That is not the reality for vast numbers of especially minority families in our inner cities.
Which means some extremely bright students are not living up to their potential or getting the opportunity to attend these selective schools.
The Jewish emphasis on Education was also the result of economic factors. Having to do with restrictions on property ownership in several European countries . But every immigrant group represents those with substantial enough resources to just get up and leave. It also represents those with the ambition to do so. So as in other areas, there is an inherent selection bias in immigrant groups. Especially in the vanguards of these groups. As more and more of any immigrant group migrates, I suspect those selection biases start to disappear.
Although on face value the Asian community is over represented in NYC’s Selective High Schools, what the uncontextualized statistic doesn’t tell you is the socioeconomic backgrounds of the applicants. With 1.2 million Asians in NYC it is possible that a small slice of that population is over represented.
LikeLike
Asian people fought hard to keep racially biased tests in place for admissions and won. Now they will suffer the consequences, and live with segregation, inequality, and the pain the cause everyone. Awesome.
LikeLike
How are the tests racially biased?
LikeLike
In order to make such a bold claim, I assume that you have you examined the sample SHSAT test items found on their website. So, could please specify those items which you think are racially biased – and provide some supporting evidence. Thank you.
LikeLike
Here’s the link:
https://www.schools.nyc.gov/learning/testing/specialized-high-school-admissions-test
LikeLike
Standardized tests are racially biased. Have a nice day.
LikeLike
I assume you mean performance on standardized tests is racially disparate.
LikeLike
Nope. Standardized tests are inherently racially biased. Have a nice day.
LikeLike
Not much of an argument or explanation there, but ok.
LikeLike
So you believe that NYS learning standards in math and language arts are somehow biased against Black and Hispanic children? This suggests that you think that Blacks and Hispanics are less academically capable than Asians or Whites. That’s not my take; I think that children from poor, single mother homes face nearly insurmountable obstacles when it comes to academic success at the highest level. NYC demographic data shows that this may be the issue rather than their race.
LikeLike
There’s the problem, people thinking integration means lowering standards. Integration doesn’t mean lowering standards. It means lowering pretentiousness. The narrow set of skills supposedly identified by standardized tests does not capture the diversity of knowledge and ability among the entire population. The scores are dog whistles to those with bias in their hearts, fear of others, and an unwillingness to break de facto segregation’s suffocating grip on all our lives.
And no, I don’t have time to explain everything in detail with an annotated bibliography. I’ll give you a list of a few well researched, annotated books on the subject which you can read if you like. On the other hand, I’m not sure which comes first, the book reading or the open mind.
LikeLike
“The narrow set of skills supposedly identified by standardized tests does not capture the diversity of knowledge and ability among the entire population.”
Standardized tests of advanced mathematics do a pretty good job capturing the mathematics knowledge and ability of test takers.
This isn’t about “integration.” You can’t integrate the entire NYC school system into Stuyvesant High School. There are limited seats.
LikeLike
It is possible for diverse populations of students to earn high marks in “advanced” middle school math courses and for district leaders to rely on those grades, trusting the teachers and students to uphold academic integrity rather than relying on standardized tests that also include language questions and the barriers that come with them. The tests are used to reinforce the biases of those cultures which are already historically advantaged in this country, to maintain the status quo. Be not biased against the grades earned by students who aren’t white or Asian. Do not fancy their schools as failing. Think not of their teachers as having low expectations. Let go all high stakes testing requirements in kindergarten through twelve.
LikeLike
“standardized tests that also include language questions and the barriers that come with them. The tests are used to reinforce the biases of those cultures which are already historically advantaged in this country, to maintain the status quo.”
Rage gave you a link to sample questions that you could look at—I’d be interested to see if there were questions that you think pose language barriers to test takers. I do find it very odd that you think SHSAT questions have language that is biased against American-born native English speakers but also in favor of Asian students, a large portion of whose parents do not speak English.
LikeLike
Okay, that’s quick and easy. All the questions about reading passages presume background knowledge and interest in the subject matter. The first few sets of questions on Sample Test A ask about coding, ravens, Mildred Walker, and the Massachusetts State Park. I can answer the questions without even reading the passages. Some can. Others cannot. Some have more background knowledge instead of other subjects. (Also, as a side note, nonstandard English mechanics on the grammar questions are not shown deserving respect. There are different ways of constructing meaning, but that’s a whole semester of a California teacher education course in the CLAD battery to explain.)
When I’m grading essays, for example, the grades I give are not based on how well my students fit their language and thinking to mine, but on how well they think critically through their own lenses. That’s what should be evaluated, the ability to reason. When I have students, especially gifted students who don’t show interest in reading about birds, state parks, or talking pineapples, I let them read of their choosing so that they can excel without having to cross over.
Thank you for asking. This is becoming a good conversation, methinks.
LikeLike
And I can see it coming: Don’t I think doctors and lawyers should know about Mildred Walker? Don’t I think doctors and lawyers should know about Alice Walker.
LikeLike
Finally, it’s vital that test prep does not dominate education. It’s a short cut. The creme de la creme should spend their time in public libraries learning instead of in college prep tutoring narrowing.
LikeLike
Thank you, LCT.
LikeLike
You seem to be confusing socio-economic bias with racial bias. I can’t imagine a poor White student having any advantage over a Black student in those examples.And I can imagine a Black student from an upper class family having a huge advantage over that poor white kid. And I fail to see how the test provides an advantage to a first generation Asian student, one that they supposedly fought to preserve. So the SHSAT clearly favors children from affluent, two-parent families, regardless of their skin color.
LikeLike
“And I can imagine a Black student from an upper class family having a huge advantage over that poor white kid.”
Rage—I’ve seen data from prior SATs that show white test takers with incomes below $20,000 did about as well as black test takers with incomes over $200,000. Surprising to me but true.
LikeLike
FLERP
That’s pretty hard to believe. If accurate, that would be a startling revelation. Could it simply be a cultural difference with respect to education?
LikeLike
Rage, this is from 2009. Check the table in the right-hand column, showing the “mean white score” for incomes under $20,000 as 978, and the “mean black score” for incomes over $200,000 as 981.
https://www.jbhe.com/latest/index012209_p.html
I haven’t been able to find the underlying College Board data, but this is consistent with an earlier study, based on 2003 College Board data.
https://t.co/fw8nJqhZhb
I don’t know if the College Board has broken out scores this way after 2009. Anyway, it is pretty stunning.
LikeLike
I don’t know the reason why. But this makes it pretty clear that, at least for the SAT (although I don’t know why other standardized tests would be different), income disparities do NOT explain the group-level performance disparities between black and white (and presumably asians) test takers.
LikeLike
FLERP
More than surprising, and as a former test writer, very intriguing. Makes me wonder if that data hold true on the math section, or is it the reading/ vocabulary that shifts it in that direction? I’d really like to see the break down on the old SAT II biology, chemistry, and physics exams which were discontinued in 2021. Subject specific and very objective tests would tend to weed out prior knowledge from home, as few students have the benefit of having a scientist or science teacher as a parent.
As for the why, it is impossible to know, and foolish to guess. Going out on a limb, I would think its priority that some groups place on formal education v. those that don’t get bent out of shape over it. My observations from teaching in a very diverse school seem to indicate that some groups simply take their learning much, much more seriously than others, which is directly related to parental expectations.
LikeLike
RageAgainstTheEdumeddlers
“This suggests that you think that Blacks and Hispanics are less academically capable than Asians or Whites. That’s not my take; I think that children from poor, single mother homes face nearly insurmountable obstacles when it comes to academic success at the highest level”
Are those socioeconomic factors that you touch on,not a racial bias in themselves. And what are the reasons some children disproportionately come from “poor, single mother homes”?
Are those outcomes the result of a racial bias that has affected economic outcomes for generations. It has been less than 50 years since the civil rights act was passed. The act giving equal access ‘under the law’ to economic opportunity, a far shorter time since that equal access was achieved. If it has been achieved? That does not even touch on other racial bias in law enforcement that creates many other poor outcomes. A little over a decade ago if they had set up a stop and frisk outside my High preforming Long Island High School, I suspect the economic outcomes of the student body would be slightly different. Well maybe not ,the economic circumstance of the parents would likely result in those charges being dropped and the Police Commissioner being fired.
LikeLike
So, by your estimation it will always be impossible to develop learning standards (and tests) that are not racially biased against poor minorities. That kind of thinking implies hopelessness and a doom loop existence for millions of kids. If in fact, you are correct, that means there is no way to break the link between generational poverty and being undereducated as the educational system will continue to throw racially biased roadblocks in front of impoverished children from dysfunctional families. That’s a pretty bleak outlook that is more enabling than enlightening.
However, lowering standards at the elite NYC high schools is not the solution and would be an insult that small handful of Black and Hispanic students that have been accepted. Besides, the very high bar set by Stuyvasent, Bronx Science, and a few others does not exclude educational opportunities found elsewhere in the city system.
LikeLike
RageAgainstTheEdumeddlers
You are making the assumption that education is the cure for Generational poverty. Lack of education was not the cause of that poverty. Unequal access to the economic gains was and remains the cause. Prior to and even many decades after the Civil Rights act was was passed.
The gains experienced by Whites in the last century and not Blacks were no accident of history. Much of it the result of conscious racially motivated political decisions. From Davis Bacon that was aimed at keeping Black labor out of Northern Construction Industries and in share cropping ,to the NLRA which excluded Farm and Restaurant Labor from minimum wage (still in effect) because many were minority, to the GI Bill which excluded Black Vets from higher Education bennifits.
“The average household income of a Black college graduate is $68,000, almost $30,000 more than a white household without a high school diploma, but about $25,000 less than white college graduates.” Same applies to disparities in home ownership, most Americans greatest source of transferable wealth.
We can talk a little CRT and ask how unequal enforcement of the law in Black neighborhoods or on Highways has added to the numbers of single parent multi generational female headed households since Nixon launched a war on (Blacks) drugs. As Michelle Alexander does in detail in the new Jim Crow.
Black and White youth and young men use drugs at similar rates. Yet the arrest rates and conviction rates of Blacks are multiple times that of whites. Leading to those high rates of single parent households. And persistent poverty for those
with prior convictions.
https://www.hrw.org/legacy/campaigns/drugs/war/key-facts.htm
The percentage of prime age(25-54) workers with a college degree or post HS certifications in 2009 was 37%. In spite of the illusion presented that it went up to 53% by 2021. The percentage graduating with 4 year degrees are not increasing. What has increased dramatically are the number of employers padding their bottom line by having the worker come ready packaged with the training that employers used to provide on the Job. A whole lot of certificates.
The tiny number of students accepted to these specialty HSs in NYC is not a solution for the vast majority of inner city youth. Education is a part of the solution economic access and equality of that opportunity are far more important. If there are socioeconomic factors that make a test inherently biased not because of the questions but because of the socioeconomic advantages of one group over another then affirmative action is a solution and not for just the best and the brightest. The Children of Asian immigrants who come here with advanced degrees on H1B or Student visas can claim they have no advantage over inner city minority youth but that is not truly the case.
But in that great American tradition the Taliban 6 court is about to move us in the wrong direction once again. They have been doing so for quite some time. Add Janus and this week Glacier Northwest two stakes in the heart of Unions that built the Middle class and that now Minorities finally have access to. Next week it will be Affirmative Action on the chopping block.
LikeLike
I don’t know the reason why. But this makes it pretty clear that, at least for the SAT (although I don’t know why other standardized tests would be different), income disparities do NOT explain the group-level performance disparities between black and white (and presumably asians) test takers.
LikeLike
oops wrong spot
LikeLike
I feel as if I make this comment every year, but here goes again.
The SHSAT is NOT a test that you “pass.”
I repeat, the SHSAT is NOT a test that you “pass”.
The SHSAT is a test that requires ONLY one thing — that you OUTSCORE at least 80% of the other students WHO ARE TAKING THE TEST THAT YEAR.
The SHSAT is like a college professor walking into a Harvard math class of 500 students and saying “In this class, the only grade will be the final exam, and the 100 students with the highest scores will get As and the rest of you – the other 400 students – will get Fs”. Students ranked #80 – #90 all received a 90% score. Students ranked #90 – #100 all received an 89% score. They ALL received As. Students ranked #101 – 120 all received an 88% score. They ALL received Fs in the course.
I don’t think anyone can argue with a straight face that the 20 students who scored an 88% on the final were so vastly inferior to the 20 students who scored an 89% on the exam that one group deserves an A and the other deserves an F.
I don’t think anyone can argue without looking stupid that if the students who got an 89 in the final had to be the same math class with the students who got an 88, their education would have to be “dumbed down” and they could not achieve all that they were meant to achieve.
But that’s what ignorant people say about the SHSAT.
And this matters because a 13 year old doesn’t have to learn enough to PASS, they have to learn enough to OUTSCORE the majority of the other students taking the exam THAT YEAR.
It’s not enough to “do well”. Students must “do BETTER”. The more some kids study, the more the rest have to study. It’s led to an arms race in test prep because to get into a specialized high school you must score higher than 80% of the students who take the exam. If 10,000 MIT students sat for the SAT, only 20% would “pass” and the rest “fail”.
(Sidenote: the way the SHSAT is “scored” is also incredibly complicated, but suffice it to say that a kid can get more questions wrong than another kid and still get a higher SHSAT score and get a seat in a specialized high school when the other kid who missed fewer questions does not)
It isn’t good or healthy for any kid.
The specialized high schools are amazing places for kids lucky enough to have outscored 80% of the other students taking the exam that year. The schools have traditionally attracted first generation students from so many backgrounds. “Asian” covers an extremely diverse group of students from various backgrounds whose parents come from so many countries. “White” includes many first generation students from eastern european countries.
But it is absolutely correct that all of those students lose out if they are in a school where there are almost no Black or Latino students present.
Mayor de Blasio did something rather brilliant. He expanded the Discovery Program so that each year, the students who got in because they outscored other students taking the exam are joined by a significant number of disadvantaged students who are fantastic, motivated students who didn’t happen to have one of the very highest scores on this single exam, the SHSAT.
And they fit in perfectly well. And every time I hear someone say “oh that kid struggled”, I think about how many affluent parents at specialized high schools post on facebook pages asking for tutor recommendations. LOTS of students struggle, even if they had one of the highest SHSAT scores.
At some specialized high schools, the range of students’ SHSAT scores is more than 100 points! But no one looks at a student’s SHSAT score once they are admitted. They do well or don’t do well based on many factors beyond the score.
And the SHSAT doesn’t have to be thrown out, but it also doesn’t have to remain the ONLY criteria. There are so many options in between.
Among the options are to make the SHSAT the kind of test people ALREADY BELIEVE it is! A test that a kid “passes” because there is a passing score that demonstrates their ability to do advanced work.
and then use some creativity to figure out how to choose among those who “pass” the exam. Which could still include some percentage admitted entirely because they had the very highest SHSAT score.
LikeLike
NYC public school parent
If they did as you suggest, some parents would be absolutely devastated. I am not certain their children would be.
You touch on a key factor, the number of first generation children of immigrants. What would be interesting is a study detailing the socioeconomic backgrounds of all those who were accepted and applied. I suspect that it would show that acceptance represents a far smaller segment of a community than merely saying Asian. It would also highlight how the economic circumstances of the parents of various immigrant groups vary. An Asian family accepted here on a student or H1B visa vs parents who fled death squads in Latin America. Their children may have equal potential but not equal opportunity.
Evolution does not work fast. Second generation children did not lose brain cells. The socioeconomic factors that drive these families to push achievement change. Other avenues to economic prosperity open up. And in some cases education in itself did not lead to the desired outcomes. Brace yourself for AI. It may give new life to the Social Sciences and Humanities.
LikeLike
Joel,
NO ONE “applies and gets accepted”. I hate that terminology because it causes the entire debate to be warped.
Kids take a test – one chance – and they are stack ranked by their scores. That’s it.
That determines their future.
There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that a student who gets the 4,000th highest score is any different or more academically capable than the student who gets the 6,000th highest score. Not one iota.
There IS evidence that the student who gets the 4,000th highest score is more capable than the student who gets the 20,000th highest score. And people point to a meaningless (but true!) statistic to say that this means that a student who gets the 4,000th highest score is vastly superior to the student who gets the 6,000th highest score. But any scientist would immediately recognize the huge flaw in logic. Any NYT education reporter would not.
Is there even one specialized high school parent who believes that their kid’s should be stacked ranked according to their FIRST SAT score and admitted to college ONLY via that SAT score? I doubt it.
LikeLike
NYC public school parent
You are focusing on the testing aspect of admissions. I don’t disagree. My comment was in response to the socioeconomic factors you touched on.
“The schools have traditionally attracted first generation students from so many backgrounds. “Asian” covers an extremely diverse group of students from various backgrounds whose parents come from so many countries. “White” includes many first generation students from eastern European countries.”
There is an inherent selection bias here similar to most selection bias(ie Charter Schools ) . Saying Asian, including East Asian does not say much about the parents. The reality is the H1B and Student Visas that many if not most Asian parents came in on gave their children an advantage . It is not that they were first generation children of immigrants. They were first generation children of highly educated parents whose migration was enabled by their education and whose careers were dependent on that education. I might add children of parents with the economic means of migrating here as compared to most of their countrymen. Most being middle or upper middle class when they migrated. The poor not having the means and the wealthy not having the desire.
LikeLike
You write, “Admission to the selective high schools is considered a ticket to the best colleges,” but actually that is not true. There are many research studies that show that attending one of these schools has little effect on the quality or selectivity of the college students attend. See https://www.jstor.org/stable/43189489 for example, and https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/10/is-attending-the-best-high-school-academically-irrelevant/505940/ The reality is that using one high-stakes test as the sole admissions criterion to any school violates the principles of every testing association, the APA etc., especially given the SHSAT has never been independently validated for racial bias and in fact has been shown to be gender biased, with far fewer girls admitted into these schools even though they get better grades and state test scores.
LikeLike
Going to Stuy is definitely not an automatic ticket to the “best colleges”—students still have to do very well at Stuy, and a lot of those students can’t afford the “best colleges.” People who want a ticket to the best colleges do what you did: send their kids to elite NYC private schools that cost $65k+ per year.
LikeLike
Going to an elite private school is not an automatic ticket to the “best colleges.” As I said in the post, you have to work very hard after you gain admission to earn your way into a top college. Competition to get into an Ivy school is even tougher than competition to get into Stuy or Bx Science.
LikeLike
I know Dalton’s placement stats. It’s in another league than Stuy.
LikeLike
“People who want a ticket to the best colleges do what you did: send their kids to elite NYC private schools that cost $65k+ per year.”
Have to agree with FLERP! here. Obviously not an “automatic” ticket, but a far easier pathway.
The one exception is for the amazing specialized high school students who are QuestBridge and Posse Scholars. Those programs rightly recognize low-income students and give them full rides at amazing colleges.
LikeLike
So much standardized testing mental masturbation so little time!
LikeLike