So, Bikki didn’t give zeros (even if deserved) because it skewed the class average, and thus HIS scores with the administration. If we’re talking about not giving students all this bullshit, retaking tests and many times as needed, etc…then, why are we okay with giving them 50 points for their fucking name? If they didn’t earn it, why are they giving it to them? That means you only have to get 10 points to get a D.
Is this like the Academic Decathlon? Junior year I scored really high on my pre-SAT, asked to join. I played football throughout high school, chased girls…so, I wasn’t the academic that I felt belonged in that group with the valedictorian and salutatorian. But, fearing I wouldn’t get into college because my high school sucked and didn’t explain the fact that most of those clubs don’t mean anything, I joined several organizations. With most, like Future Business Leaders of America, people who had been working hard in them for years were usurped when I joined and took over and then proceeded to do literally nothing. I still feel bad about a couple of them, thirty years later. But, I had teacher who was the Ac-Dec coach who promised me that if I joined, I could count it as a class and with the competition over I think mid semester…he’d let me do what I want for the rest of the time and give me an A. Simple choice.
I walked into the first study session with the group and was looked at like I was a criminal. I did not belong, for sure. I walked home with a silver, the highest medal on the team. Who’d have figured, outside of that one teacher who believed in me. I still keep up with that fella. Good guy…one of the only people in my life who invested in me and thought more of me than I did myself. I’m sure many of your guys think that way about you, even after all these years.
Negative. He said it skewed the STUDENT’S average to the point that they would never be able to recover from a single zero. He specifically said they wouldn’t be able to redeem themselves.
I get the pushback on “giving 50 points for a name”, and I’m not sure I agree with that drastic a measure, but keep in mind that 50 points is an F.
EDIT:
For the record, I think bikki repeats enough stupid shit that people don’t need to mischaracterize what he says. Please don’t make me defend bikki anymore!
I don’t think standardized testing in general is racist, no.
Yes, skeeter, I see how he wants me to agree with him. Do you see how I don’t? You guys just finished saying I back them up on everything but there’s plenty I disagree with them on.
Brigham had helped to develop aptitude tests for the U.S. Army during World War I and – commissioned by the College Board - was influential in the development of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). At the time, he and other social scientists considered the SAT a new psychological test and a supplement to existing college board exams.
Absolutely brilliant brookings article that does nothing to help me, but everyone should read.
Too often, test designers rely on questions which assume background knowledge more often held by White, middle-class students. It’s not just that the designers have unconscious racial bias; the standardized testing industry depends on these kinds of biased questions in order to create a wide range of scores.
We have become overly reliant on a system of standardized testing that continues to produce the results it was designed to get—a spread of scores that maps neatly to race and socio-economic factors. These test scores, in turn, justify closing schools in poor communities of color and barring Black and Latinx students from educational opportunities, and thereby, from jobs that support a middle-class life.
Some other colleges say they are permanently moving away from standardized tests amid criticism that the exams favor wealthy, white applicants and disadvantage minority and low-income students.
The most forbidden subject in all of academe is the study of race and intelligence. The first person ever to be banned from speaking at Yale was Daniel Hernstein.
There is nothing intrinsically racist in standardized testing. It is an exceptional way in determining academic success.
Equality of outcomes is a mythical dream. Or, should we insist that at least ten percent of NBA and NFL players be Asians? Making tests less challenging for benefit of the stupid is of itself very stupid. Standards are important for successful human societies. There is nothing racist in having one day for all voting (few absentees) in which all voters must have a picture ID. If you cannot obtain an ID, then you are most likely too stupid to engage in the elective process.
DJ, I don’t care if something was racist 100 years ago. Slavery used to be legal. Black people couldn’t vote. Etc. I am not denying racism was a rampant part of this country in the past.
What I am saying is that standardized testing in general is not racist.
What are these questions specifically that are biased against black students? Do you have an example we can discuss?
Yes, some schools dropped standardized testing. Guess what? Some schools have kept it, and even other schools that had dropped it brought it back.
A report conducted by UC professors and released in January 2020 – part of a years-long review of admissions processes – used data from many years of students and concluded that admissions tests, which have since been abandoned, actually protected diversity.
So great, we both showed each other some articles. Did either of us win the debate yet?
Here’s an idea, let’s actually HAVE A DEBATE.
Tell me why, in your own words, standardized testing is racist. Let’s use some critical thinking and get to the bottom of this.
Oh stop 305 progressive wrote an article calling it racist…Therefore it is. Doesn’t matter the article doesn’t make a lick of sense. Especially if Rachel Maddow backs it up for these race cultists
Don’t fuck with the racism police…sick, sick people…
Notice the one article…CNN can’t even help themselves when they do try to see both sides
“The SAT haters may have it all wrong”
Why does anyone have to be all wrong, or right.? You don’t like the test…Don’t worry about it and make your living in a field that doesn’t require a good score. Plenty of ways to do your thing in this world.
“Standardized testing,” literally can’t be racist — Is that what you mean? Like it isn’t an living object that prefers that one race is more superior than another?
Or are you saying that systemic racism doesn’t exist within standardized testing?
I’m saying, if you want to convince me that SAT questions have a racial bias, you’re gonna need to come up with a significant number of examples.
That NGLC article you posted says, “Unlike standardized tests that intentionally include questions biased against students of color…” yet it never establishes that fact.
I’m not asking for you to show me people making the claim that standardized testing is racist. I am aware the claims are out there.
I’m asking for significant examples that show the SAT is racially biased. I’m asking for a conversation where we both can use critical thinking and debate skills, instead of whole hog believing what somebody else assumes as fact and prints.
As I recall, it was once presumed by liberals that language and culture surpressed the scores of black persons taking IQ tests. So, psychometric researchers developed a host of non-verbal and culture-free examination to test correlation with the Stanford-Binet test. When the results were examined, they found that black test subjects did worse significantly on the non-verbal tests than the worded Stanford Binet. Nearly, the same bell curve as that of the Stanford Binet resulted after the Non-Verbal tests were administered.
Purposefully, I never averred that I.Q. and intelligence are the same. Intelligence is said to be the product of more than one hundred factors. Factor analysis of IQ tests finds that these tests are comprised of but 8 factors of intelligence. It is settled science that whatever you wish to call IQ testing their results are both reliable and valid. They are emphatically not racist. However, results indicate that Askenazi Jews score highest of any ethnic group. Asians score higher than do Caucasians, and Africans score lowest. (My writing this will no doubt be conflated as racism, but it is not) Even publishing test results can get one in trouble.
Is playing basketball racist when the majority of players are black? Could it be that black players are better on the average than players of other races? What about track and field sprinters? How would the racial breakdown come out were we to compare top sprinters on the basis of race.
You cannot blame all the poor performance of the world’s underclasses on environment. We know from horse racing that inheritance plays a huge role in future generations. However, technology may some day be able to level the intellectual playing field through genetic research and manipulation. There is no reason why humans cannot progress through another state of mutatation wherein they live longer, healthier lives, and possess superior intellect. Already, the Chinese are doing eugenic research to produce persons of paranormal intellect.
I have always thought that humans will achieve immortality but not as organic carbon creatures. There may be a time when humans make the leap from animal to robot, immortal so long as properly maintained. I wonder when this happens what will be the status of relgion and sex. Will science be able to simulate orgasmic pleasure? Would there be races of robots? Surely, there would to be governance. To this end, we need another Isaac Assimov.