Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by BNAG8R, May 16, 2019.
All blacks are poor. Racist.
Brought to you by that gave us Common Core
How do you know that? We only know about the people who got caught. What about the people who didnt get caught? And how long has this been going on? From the articles, it serns like a long time. They were really blase about it.
Blondes tell Swonkey jokes. Then they are allowed through to bless society with skills and smarts at comoonity organizing and protests on their way to Congress.
I keep getting links to WP an WSJ and cannot read them. I dont subscribe. I would like to know what all 15 factors they use. I dont see why it would effect the SAT score. Just let that stand alone. Or like Ava said, throw the test out. I figure most colleges now days (at least their people that pick and choose) know who is gonna make it and who is not. And like Doc said, many want money and are looking for that way to keep it rolling in even if students are not up to par.
They won’t release their criteria or formulas. The College Board is making a huge, idiotic and inappropriate mistake in trying to massage data this way. Seems to me that a college admissions office is the the place to evaluate the back story and specific circumstances of a student then assess the weight the SAT should have in the admission decision. I’m happy for them to actively seek bright, capable and industrious students coming out of rough places and experiences. They can collect the demographic data to identify a pool for closer attention and do the exploration. With all the data we have and can collect now it wouldn’t be that hard. And thy have to contend with the lying liars who craft false stories to gain an unfair advantage. But the whole perception of the hierarchy of undergraduate colleges is waaaay overblown. It isn’t where you go to school, it’s what you do while you’re there and what you do with the opportunities you get. The best reward success brings is the next opportunity. Life is found in the striving, not a status.
Sigh.....right click the link. Then choose Incognito or Private. You're welcome.
Sounds like a BS system also but at least it might get rid of some wealthy minority family kids getting into schools just because of their race.
Two schools have piloted the system... Yale and.... FSU
Still wants me to subscribe or sign in at WSJ havent tried the Wapo
As previously said, they aren't releasing the 15 factors or how they plan to score them. They've made some general statements about things like crime rate, income, quality of the school, whether both parents live at home, etc. They say they don't want to release the factors because then parents will try to game the system. Uh, no kidding. Of course they will. It's what they do. If this happens, parents will transfer their kids out of their fancy prep school into a failing inner city school for their last semester of HS (while private tutors finish their education), or they'll buy a home in a crappy part of town, or mom and dad will get "divorced" and mom will have no income and an address in a dump, whatever. People will always try to game the system. The whole point of the SAT was to give a kid from a NYC public school the same test as the kid from rural Mississippi as the kid from a public school in San Francisco as the kid from Brooker. It was a way to compare kids from all over on the same test. Yes, parents game the system now. Their kids are pumped full of adderal and given extra time on the test. I agree that's BS but it's driven by perverting federal law, the ADA, not because the SAT people like it or want it that way. Nobody I know had extra time for the SAT. My friends at UF were middle to lower-middle class. I had more poor friends than rich friends. By far. As for using ADA to game the system, colleges have been doing it for athletes for many years. Remember all the FSU football players diagnosed with learning disabilities so they could get special treatment? Brenda Monk ratted them out maybe 10 years ago. People will always try to game the system. I don't think the solution is for the SAT folks to bump some scores up and others down based on 15 unverified and unknown factors that can be gamed anyway. I think the SAT should be a measure of how prepared you are academically to succeed in college. If everybody else in your class scored over 1400, and you scored 900 but you had it rough so you get in anyway, you won't succeed, no matter how smart you actually are. You simply don't have the bare minimum tools you need. Now if you scored a 1200 maybe you have the minimal tools you need to succeed. In that case, I'm OK with a college looking into your background for extenuating circumstances. I think that sort of case-by-case basis can provide a more accurate picture than the SAT people messing with their formula. Again, as a lifelong educator, I'm really interested in your thoughts. Do you think this is a more fair way to score kids, or a less fair way to score kids? Do you think this sort of qualifying factor should be made at the test level or at the college level (or both, not necessarily mutually exclusive). Personally, I'm against it. I don't see it creating the desired result and I see it potentially placing students in situations they are not adequately prepared to succeed in. Alex.
I cannot disagree with anything you said, Alex. Working always in a poor ass county with a poorly rated middle school and high school I saw kids that were going nowhere fast. The ones that made it had parents that cared. I have seen kids , by virtue of a work ethic, succeed in college. I had a girl with adhd and did poorly all through school is now succeeding in a very difficult nursing program. Parents and work ethic and knowing people love her and believe in her. I know lots of black kids with family structure like hers. Even from poor homes. I think we do a HUGE disservice to try and fit young kids into a college program with out the skills or tools to be able to succeed. I blame parents, school counselors and then universities that would ignore the obvious. I am the LAST person to tell a young person "you cannot do it" but I would tell them the truth and how difficult it is to jump in a tough school. I go back before UF was selling its soul to be the Yale of the south. It was just the southern school nearby I had been loyal to since I was old enough to love it. I had very good teachers for the most part. I felt prepared to be a teacher. I saw my room mate get a great EE degree and continue to take other classes in other engineering schools till he got his green card. I some times wonder how much better the professors are at UF now that they only accept the highest achieving HS kids. Personally, I believe there is a college for almost kids willing to work hard and have a good plan. I never took the ACT. The last test I took was the GRE and did well on it. Even better than my wife who was basically Pre Med in undergrad to be a clinical dietician. Once again I agree with you but I like to think maybe a diamond in the rough is out there in lousy inner city schools that just needs a chance no matter the test scores..............sort of like that 2 star going in the first round of the NFL draft 5 yrs later.............
You couldn't be more wrong. I did my master's thesis at UF on college admissions factors and how they correlate to academic success for student-athletes. I examined several factors including SAT scores, ACT scores, high school GPA, race, gender, socio-economic background, parental education level, distance from home, and many others. Of all of the factors, SAT scores had by far the most significant correlation with how well student-athletes performed in the classroom at UF.
I see the soft bigotry of low expectations is still in full swing. Hopefully years from now humans will all be one shade of brown and we can finally stop this nonsense.
Yup... and by far, it still comes down to how much a race (yes, I said it, it's a fact) and family value education. It's well above anything socio-economic. Someone quoted a study done by a "black" leaning institution that showed that Asians were off the chart with those two factors (no surprise), but when looking at socio-economic, whites with household income below something like $35K outperformed black households with incomes of $80K. I also remember reading a "study" (not sure of the data, but it passed the "makes sense to me" test) that said Hispanics valued education the least because they still viewed low skill, manual labor as "noble" to the exclusion of education.
This is why no one with a fully functional brain pays you any attention.
You don't have the necessary permissions to use the chat.