My SAT IIs were obviously vital to the package presented to the admissions committee because I lacked two key things critical to UC's usual stringent paradigm. One, my GPA was below Cal's 4.0+ standards. Two, I didn't take a single AP test (Dad's attitute towards APs was the same as Driving School: "It was free when I was in HS so I'm not gonna pay for that").

I approached getting into Cal FROM OUT OF STATE like a hacker: telling the system what it wants/expects to hear. That entailed a deep dive on how admissions officers think and weigh applications. Every single trade-off I made in HS was in light of that strategy. Job or heavy extra-curriculars? I'll just be broke and stack trophies. AP Econ/English/Bio or Debate? I'll suffer in Honors/Regulars and stack moar trophies. Dating or academic decathalon? Same. Prom or debate tournament? Ditto.

They do this through elimination if the application lacked the usual extracurricular items on an application due to being poor...

From this point going forward it is no longer a usual extracurricular item. The school that they are applying to has specifically told all applicants that they don’t want to hear about their subject test score. It would be unusual to include it, not to mention blatantly violating application submission instructions, which applicants are expected to carefully follow.

In any case, his name is “cognitive elite.” If he is who he says he is, then he would have find other ways to prove his eliteness/worthiness if subject tests were not being considered for any applicant. He had the initiative to study for that test. If he knew that it would have been a waste of time to study for it, then maybe he would have taken that same time and initiative to do something else to make his application stand out.

>If he is who he says he is, then he would have find other ways to prove his eliteness/worthiness if subject tests were not being considered

No, that's completely wrong and totally incorrect!

The SAT II Writing subject test was the only way for me to make up for lack of AP English, which is basically a prerequisite for the school hosting the world's top English and Rhetoric departments.

>maybe he would have taken that same time and initiative to do something else to make his application stand out.

Nope, I would have simply crossed MIT off the very short list (Stanford, Cal, MIT) of extremely niche institutions fortunate enough to be considered within my purview for eventual attendence.

MIT's anti-meritocratic, clown-world decision to ignore SAT IIs makes me furious. To hell with MIT and their woke, filthy Epstein-tainted staff/faculty/endowment. They are pulling up the class-mobility ladder on kids like me while pretending it's for the sake of social justice.

It just seems to me that MIT has looked at their data and saw that subject test scores are not a key differentiator between students who do well at MIT and students who do not. You’ve already mentioned MIT is niche. Is your alma mater with the top English and Rhetoric departments dropping these tests, or is MIT doing so? If subject test scores are not a differentiator of success at MIT, why should MIT make students go through with them, especially if that time and effort can be put towards doing other things that actually are better indicators? Maybe programming projects, etc, or whatever their case may be. Call it woke but maybe their actual numbers support their decision?

>MIT has looked at their data and saw that subject test scores are not a key differentiator between students who do well at MIT and students who do not.

Objection. Assumes Facts Not In Evidence.

Following the OP link reveals no such analysis, only a statement SAT IIs are being suddenly being ignored because "We believe this decision will improve access for students applying to MIT." That's coded language, 100% typical for their woke, clown-world admissions functionaries.

>maybe their actual numbers support their decision?

Maybe we should be verifying the actual numbers instead of swallowing whatever just-so story MIT plops out to justify the woke thing they wanted to do anyway.

After reviewing other HN articles from MIT admissions, such as “Picture yourself as a stereotypical male” (which includes the blatantly racist gem "A Good Night’s Sleep, A Hearty Breakfast, and Being White"), along with "Black Lives Matter...until they don't", and the Epstein fiasco, it becomes very clear MIT doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Let’s go back to the point where he said poor kid. It’s really hard to get those opportunities. Many poor kids have to work through high school or provide unpaid child care for their family, many of those also have to deal with food and/or housing insecurity. It’s extremely difficult to not only have the connections to get in someplace for an internship or a volunteer experience for your scholastic resume but also to be able to get there or have the time outside of work/school/family to do it.