Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The "disparities" can be explained as follows:

(1) Race differences in IQ (East Asians 105, Whites 100, Hispanics 90, Blacks 85) explain SAT gaps.

(2) Smarter people tend to earn more money and have smarter children than less intelligent people, so rich kids have higher average scores than poor ones.

(3) Men have a slight edge in math over women and a deficit in reading, reflected in SAT scores.

I now await the bus to the re-education camp.

1 posted on 11/09/2011 10:45:31 AM PST by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: reaganaut1

I took the SATs in 1964 and still waiting for my white guy bump.


2 posted on 11/09/2011 10:47:45 AM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

A high school teacher told me that if he praised the achievement of a black student, that student would get the cr*p beat out of him. Then, that student would turn into a non-achiever like all the rest. A very smart and accomplished black engineer from a poor background explained to me; “Accomplishment is seen as suckin’ up to da-man.”


3 posted on 11/09/2011 10:51:29 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
the study found that those students from lower social classes were more likely to have earned a top high school G.P.A.

Grade inflation in poor schools, I would guess.

4 posted on 11/09/2011 10:52:52 AM PST by T. P. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
In seeking academically engaged students, Mr. Soares said in an interview with The Choice, colleges should pay more attention to high school grades

Its simple - the worst schools also have the most prevalent grade-inflation. In our NE City here - a portion of the high school students are considered basically illiterate. How then did they get to High School?

The whole point of the SAT is to provide a STANDARD test for all students.

5 posted on 11/09/2011 10:53:13 AM PST by PGR88 (I'm so open-minded my brains fell out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Why in the world would a college need tests scores and grades to determine admissions. Just ask race, sex, sexual orientation, religion. That should do it.


6 posted on 11/09/2011 10:53:13 AM PST by all the best
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

“In seeking academically engaged students, Mr. Soares said in an interview with The Choice, colleges should pay more attention to high school grades and give less credence to standardized test scores.”

My son just finished up his college applications. We’ve been to any number of presentations by highly-selective colleges. Interestingly, every single one of them said they already count GPA more than standardized test scores.

But what they’re looking for is high GPA, challenging course load within the context of an individual school, AND high test scores.

However, when asked, all said they’d be more likely to admit a student with an outstanding GPA (assuming the student took as challenging a course load as his/her high school offered) and somewhat less stellar test scores than someone with outstanding test scores and only a pretty good GPA.


7 posted on 11/09/2011 10:55:07 AM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

The left is totally in love with the LIE that all people are equal. They MISapply the concept that all people are worthy of being considered human. Instead, they insist that all people be equal in the amount of money they have.

The left are thinly disguised enviers, full of jealously and greed. They destroy in their futile efforts to make equal that which CAN NOT be made equal.

Their false god is a lie.


8 posted on 11/09/2011 10:57:07 AM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
Yup! The SAT's and ACT's do discriminate...against those lazy, stupid and indifferent children who have wasted their previous school years on everything but learning. Now they will be able to get into college, run up enormous loan debt for "degrees" in "Minority Gay and Lesbian Studies". Then they can, after five or six years burst upon society and demonstrate against a system about which they haven't even a modicum of understanding. They will march dutifully to the polling place and pull the lever for the Marxist candidate that offers them shelter from the vagaries of their existence.

Oh wait, this is already happening.

9 posted on 11/09/2011 10:59:01 AM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
“The SAT and ACT are fundamentally discriminatory,” Mr. Soares said in a phone interview last week.

Well, yes - they discriminate between those who have the knowledge needed to attend a university and those who don't. That's the idea. It's not like American universities are the choice of the world anymore - many Chinese and Indians now look on American schools as safety-net schools if they can't get into the brutally selective technical and managerial schools in Asia. We shouldn't be looking for ways to dumb things down even more.
10 posted on 11/09/2011 10:59:16 AM PST by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Your bus is outside waiting for you.

I have some issues with this study. The bit about lower-income kids having higher grades can also be due to grade inflation.

Further - what is the correlation to the lower-income groups success in College versus their grades, and versus their SAT scores? I think THAT is a mandatory part of the analysis that seems left out in this short article.

After all - the SAT bills itself as a predictor of success in college.

Finally - what percentage of the lower income kids have the foundation to go to college? Or are we going to continue to insist that the college re-educate the incoming freshman to all of the capabilities that they should have gotten from their K-12 education?

I imagine Wake Forrest is going to have a rude surprise.


11 posted on 11/09/2011 10:59:18 AM PST by fremont_steve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

These people are all insane! Water seems to favor white men too apparently. Dancing on the other hand, HATES US!!


12 posted on 11/09/2011 11:11:21 AM PST by The Toll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Wake Forest.....what can you expect? Their fight song is an ode to drinking.


13 posted on 11/09/2011 11:11:21 AM PST by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

“Prior to joining the Wake Forest faculty, Soares taught as a lecturer at Harvard and was an assistant and associate professor of Sociology at Yale. In 2008, he was a member of the national education policy group for Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.” From his WFU page.

And do you think for one moment Soares sought out his “research” with any other “conclusion” in mind? Of course not. He’s just another pointy-headed pseudo-intellectual who’s racial pandering gets his name in the spotlight and soothes his white guilt. Deep inside, I bet he’s as bigoted as anyone.


15 posted on 11/09/2011 11:17:21 AM PST by A_Former_Democrat (There's nothing more hypocritical than a white liberal calling someone else a "bigot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

“Women and Minorities Hardest Hit”


16 posted on 11/09/2011 11:19:20 AM PST by lightninglad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
Offer proof of your 2nd assertion.
19 posted on 11/09/2011 11:44:11 AM PST by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
He characterizes it as a test that tends to favor white, male, upper income students with the means to prepare for it. Chang Young Chung, a statistical programmer, and Thomas J. Espenshade, a sociology professor, both at Princeton University

Irony Alert.

21 posted on 11/09/2011 12:02:44 PM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

It’s now Wake Forrest Gump University.


22 posted on 11/09/2011 12:04:08 PM PST by Reeses (Have you mocked a Democrat today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
The truth is the SAT accurately predicts success in college. The correlation is indisputable.
23 posted on 11/09/2011 12:18:02 PM PST by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

I’d wager there is a cultural element to the differences as well, insomuch as parents usually need to push their kids to study and take practice tests, then retake the tests to get a better score. If the parents aren’t involved, then the kids will not do these things, and their scores will suffer.


26 posted on 11/09/2011 1:19:45 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Plenty of good points on this thread, but keep in mind this big one.

Standardized tests exist to PREDICT future performance (like success in college). Bias can easily be discovered if it turns out that one group is OVER-performing compared to what their test scores would have predicted. (This requires an honest measure of the later performance being predicted).

If blacks were kicking academic butt in college beyond what their scores would suggest, then the tests are probably biased.

I’ve seen no evidence of this.


27 posted on 11/09/2011 2:53:21 PM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Author of BullionBible.com - Makes You a Precious Metal Expert, Guaranteed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson