Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 11/7/2002 7:45:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/7/2002 7:47:37 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
The SAT is gonna change big time real soon. The reasons? 1) To get away from the evil of trying to measure or estimate "intelligence" - that's an obscene word in our dumbed-down, hypersensitive, self-esteem-centered PC world now. 2) To make poor blacks look better by hopefully closing the enormous test score gap between blacks and whites. 3) To keep the SAT's monopoly on the major Universities - especially the UC college system.
[URL=http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/021111/education/11sat.htm]The SAT Revolution[/URL] The new test spells the end of IQ–and big changes for American education. USNews. 11/11/02 {T}he era of intelligence testing is about to end. Thanks to an unprecedented assault from the head of the University of California system, the College Board (the nonprofit organization that owns the SAT) has begun its biggest overhaul ever of the test. {B}y 2005 the board plans to strip out the analogies section, ask questions based on more-advanced [b]math[/b], and add a [red]grammar and essay-writing[/red] test. Rather than assess [red]raw intelligence[/red] [???], the new SAT is intended to measure [red]academic preparedness[/red]. "In its original form it was an IQ test," says Gaston Caperton, the College Board president. "[red]What we have done is take the SAT and make it into something that tests reasoning and developed skill."[/red]
View Quote
Well if an IQ test doesn't measure "reasoning and developed skill", then what does it test??? And what the hell is "developed skill" anyway?? Apparently by adding more math, grammar and writing, what they mean by "academic preparedness" is the three 'Rs'. So is this the liberal, teach-nothing, educational elite's version of admitting all their meddling, navel-picking efforts over the last 40 years have been a failure and now they want to return to the basics? . . .
(Originally the SAT) was designed to measure innate intelligence, not what students had learned in school. By the 1960s, almost all public-school children were given a group-administered IQ test. But the tests always had critics who were skeptical that intelligence was fixed or even measurable. Because blacks, as a group, scored lower than whites on the tests, [red]some opponents argued that the assessments really reflected economic disadvantage, not intellectual difference.[/red]
View Quote
Hello!? McFly!? MAYBE... economic disadvantage is often a RESULT of weak intellectual abilities?? MAYBE... some people are poor BECAUSE they are inherently stupid and can't get or hold a decent job but still manage to procreate and pass their "stupid" genes on to their myriad of stupid offspring who then score low on IQ tests in school. And as far as blacks and lower test scores, what do you suppose they'll do if it turns out that blacks still score lower on this new and improved "reasoning and developed skill" SAT test? Are they gonna just spot the blacks a few hundred points to "level the playing field"? (again) . . .
The Educational Testing Service, which was created to write and administer the SAT for the College Board, insists that its exam ceased being an IQ test as far back as 1946. That was the year many logic items were replaced with questions based on reading passages. Despite those changes, question styles that are staples of IQ tests, like analogies, remained on the SAT, and many students, parents, and teachers still think of the SAT as the last mass-administered intelligence exam. "I think the SAT tests cleverness," says Danny Jaye, the head of the mathematics department at New York City's prestigious Stuyvesant High School. [red]"It is not a content test as much as it is an IQ test."[/red] . . . The ACT, founded in 1959 as the American College Testing Program, is the College Board's great rival and ideological opposite. The SAT measures students' ability to learn. [red]The ACT measures what students have already learned.[i.e. "content"][/red] [i][red]{well if the ACT already tests for content, they why not just use that?}[/red][/i] [red]The College Board had no intention of letting California become an ACT state[/red]. Californians make up 12.6 percent of the 2.2 million annual SAT test takers–a sizable chunk of the [red]$141 million[/red] the College Board takes in from its college admissions tests each year. Faced with the possibility that its most important customer would leave for the competition, the College Board caved and began to talk about changing the entire SAT.
View Quote
AHHH!!! NOW we are getting somewhere!! "Follow the money! " "Never ask me about my business." . . .
"[red]There is a risk that by incorporating more advanced math,[/red] for example, it will make the test more sensitive to differences in schooling." Too often, she adds, [red]"kids who go to school in poor areas do not have access to competent instruction.[/red]"
View Quote
So... throw out the higher standards rather than throw out shitty teachers? Gotta be a liberal to understand that logic. . . .
"The SAT inspires dysfunctional educational behavior," (Jeff Rubenstein, a Princeton Review assistant vice president) says. "Students shouldn't be memorizing words like lummox or malinger. [red]They should be reading Dickens or Shakespeare.[/red]"
View Quote
Dickens? Shakespeare? Don't they mean Angelou, Du Bois and Chomsky? . . .
Reformers hope students see that the changes mean they can boost their scores–and reduce their testing anxiety–by taking rigorous classes, honing important life skills, and demanding more from their schools.
View Quote
Yeah, well I'm not holding my breath for that to happen. Odds are when some students (especially minorities) continue to fail miserably compared to others, they'll discard this version of the SAT just like the last one and then maybe switch to an even MORE important measure of a person's academic potential - like [b]community service and multicultural sensitivity[/b].
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 1:22:37 PM EDT
And people wonder why I think teachers are scum as a general rule.
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 1:30:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Redmanfms: And people wonder why I think teachers are scum as a general rule.
View Quote
I'm not a teacher - I'm a researcher who is required to teach as part of my contract (so you can't mean me [:D] ). Actually, there are some reasons for why minorities (particularly blacks) may do worse on tests like the SAT than their IQ/Intelligence/whatever warrants. It is not because the SAT is "culturally biased" or was "normed on white kids in the 60's" or some of the many explanations that black people often believe - BUT it is precisely because there is a widespread BELIEF in the black commuinity that it is an unfair test that it ends up being a problem. Self-fulfilling prophecies commonly occur (much research exists on this), and so some blacks do not bother to study as hard as they might, because they think the test is unfairly biased against them, and how hard are you really going to try to play agame that is rigged against you? If you were applying for a job where you KNEW the cmpany was under enormous pressure to hire a black person, would you really try as hard as if you thought you had an even playing field. I'm not saying the SAT is biased, but the widespread BELIEF in a group that it is, can create the problem, and ultimately result in a mean difference between that group and others as some members become less committed. Just my $.02 - it is actually a somewhat tangled and complex problem.
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 1:32:33 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Redmanfms: And people wonder why I think teachers are scum as a general rule.
View Quote
No, I don't wonder. I hate teachers too.
Link Posted: 11/7/2002 1:37:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/7/2002 1:40:06 PM EDT by The_Macallan]
Originally Posted By Redmanfms: And people wonder why I think teachers are scum as a general rule.
View Quote
Though there are some EXCELLENT teachers in public school, MOST are scraped from the bottom of the collegiate barrel of academics. The nearly perfect inverse correlation between falling SAT scores and rising high school GPA prove to me that teachers are becoming nothing more than blowhards causing rampant grade inflation across the board. When I think back on all my teachers in all my subjects throughout school, I think there were maybe five that I thought were really good teachers. They knew their material like the back of their hand, they had clear and high standards and they modeled the intellectual behavior and attitudes that exceeded their standards. The few good teachers that are out there are vastly underpaid because the majority of teachers are incompetent hacks that aren't even worth half their salary.
Top Top