You still get the score for how well you did.

You don't get your "adversity score" which is not based on how well you did, but only on where you live and what high school you attend.

Which is absurd, considering it's involved in college admission process.

Maybe we should also have a hidden citizen score, to be used behind the scenes in the courts of law?

We should call it the social credit score.

> Which is absurd, considering it's involved in college admission process.

Your SAT score is just about the only bit of the admission process you have access to. You don't get the admissions officers' opinions on your essay, what they thought of your extracurriculars, how they perceive the reputation of your high school, what their alumni interviewers said, etc.

(Chances are you can make a pretty good guess at what the adversity score is going to be, too.)

You mean like this? https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessm...

Should adversity points be included in that citizen score?

The college admission process (especially for more elite schools) already involves lots of secrecy.

And all that secrecy should go burn in a fire. Colleges have more impact than many government institutions, and they certainly take in a lot more government funding than many government institutions. They should be as transparent as government institutions if not more (What's the rationale against? National security?).