If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic Wire)   SAT reading scores are the lowest they've been in 40 years. Thanks, television   (theatlanticwire.com) divider line 145
    More: Fail  
•       •       •

3106 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Sep 2012 at 4:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



145 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-25 08:26:37 PM
SAT reading scores are the lowest they've been in 40 years. Thanks, television

Sure, it's TV's fault. The fools we over pay for working 9 months a year to teach students bear no responsibility.
 
2012-09-25 08:29:26 PM

simplicimus: super_grass: sprd: So I guess the SAT and ACT are biased towards Asian-Americans since they consistently achieve higher scores than any other demographic. Someday science will be able to use a probe to clock your brain speed through your retinas. When that happens you will finally realize the truth even though most of you will still even deny it.

RAT'S LACISS!

On another note, why are people blaming NCLB? If anything, it encourages schools to teach kids how to take a test.

Because in the real world, some jobs require independent thought and creativity.


jjorsett: Kimothy: Maybe if the SAT and ACT actually tested what they claim to test, this wouldn't matter.

They claim they test "college readiness" but white males outscore every other group, but white females graduate from college at the highest rate. If this test really tested "college readiness" women would outscore men.


This just proves that females have a daddy that will give them more money so they can stay in school and find a husband that can get a job. Daddy doesn't want them moving back in. Junior, they can have him transfer to the school of hard knocks if he doesnt want to study.
 
2012-09-25 08:29:56 PM
The best predictor of college success is the types of classes a student takes in high school (honors, AP, etc).

But by all means let cut those classes and focus on remedial classes for the "underprivileged."
 
2012-09-25 08:33:05 PM
Expected to read that students and teachers bear no responsibility for low SAT scores, leaving satisfied. 

i46.tinypic.com
 
2012-09-25 08:40:59 PM
 
2012-09-25 08:48:23 PM

simon_bar_sinister: On a side note, did anyone else notice the links to other articles below this one?
"How not to sound racist when talking about black studies" is it possible to not sound racist, even if you are black? I got a look at the required books for that course. (Did used books as a sideline for a couple of years.) That stuff is truly racist.
Aggressively point out what dead people did. Accuse contemporaries of same activities. The louder the better. Demand compensation.


From what I saw, every problem ever caused in the world was caused by the white man. If you look at the books from a woman studies class, every problem ever caused in the world was caused by men. I would not do well in either class since I have a habit of calling out bullshiat when I see it. Did that in my polisci class in college when the teacher stated something that was easily proven false. I almost failed because of that.
 
2012-09-25 08:52:05 PM

Rambino: TV? Not TV's fault. I blame:

1. Home schooling
2. Fox News
3. Fluoride in the water
4. Vaccines
5. Cell phones
6. The Iraq war


You forgot Poland
 
2012-09-25 08:57:28 PM

Kimothy: Maybe if the SAT and ACT actually tested what they claim to test, this wouldn't matter.

They claim they test "college readiness" but white males outscore every other group, but white females graduate from college at the highest rate. If this test really tested "college readiness" women would outscore men.

All tests have built in biases - this one definitely favors mid to upper middle class white people.


I think the real value of the SAT/ACT regarding college readiness is that if you are testing in the bottom or upper 20% or so, then you probably aren't/are ready for college, respectively. Saying that a 95th percentile student is much more qualified for Harvard than a 85th percentile student, however, gives the test too much credit.

What is truly ridiculous is the General Subject GRE. For those who don't know, it's basically a difficult SAT for getting into grad school. Luckily, I double majored in a physical science and a liberal art so I was well prepared for the exam, but I felt sorry for straight science majors who were suddenly asked to write philosophical essays and read esoteric passages about literature and such. There are subject-specific GRE's, which is great, but for my field (in the sciences) there isn't so we take the general GRE. Luckily it is good for 5 years so you don't have to take it again for your phd if you go straight into it.
 
2012-09-25 09:03:27 PM
I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.
 
2012-09-25 09:12:44 PM

the money is in the banana stand: I believe that the SATs are a terrible indicator of intelligence. I am not a fan of standardized testing of any sort. There are vast amounts of subjects not even covered by the SATs. You have Math and Reading (I guess there is a Composition portion nowadays too). Never mind the fact that the scope of material for both are "odd" to say the least and not very broad, there are tons of subject matters not even addressed by the test. I have never understood the purpose of the SATs. I agree with you on the topic of inputs, the more affluent schools will have parents that give a damn, or are in a position to help their children succeed which will affect the scores - not necessarily that the quality of education is lower.


The SAT does a relatively good job at predicting what it is intended to predict (freshman college performance). Even though schools only admit within a narrow band of SAT scores the variation generally explains 10-20% of the variation in grades. It actually over predicts the performance of some groups (men and URMs), this is especially interesting for URMs because that would indicate the test is biased towards those groups.

Do you think more affluent parents only bring environmental factors? Is there a genetic disposition?
 
2012-09-25 09:14:45 PM
citoriman:

Kimothy: Maybe if the SAT and ACT actually tested what they claim to test, this wouldn't matter.

They claim they test "college readiness" but white males outscore every other group, but white females graduate from college at the highest rate. If this test really tested "college readiness" women would outscore men.

All tests have built in biases - this one definitely favors mid to upper middle class white people.

I think the real value of the SAT/ACT regarding college readiness is that if you are testing in the bottom or upper 20% or so, then you probably aren't/are ready for college, respectively. Saying that a 95th percentile student is much more qualified for Harvard than a 85th percentile student, however, gives the test too much credit.

What is truly ridiculous is the General Subject GRE. For those who don't know, it's basically a difficult SAT for getting into grad school. Luckily, I double majored in a physical science and a liberal art so I was well prepared for the exam, but I felt sorry for straight science majors who were suddenly asked to write philosophical essays and read esoteric passages about literature and such. There are subject-specific GRE's, which is great, but for my field (in the sciences) there isn't so we take the general GRE. Luckily it is good for 5 years so you don't have to take it again for your phd if you go straight into it.


Standardized tests are... Measures of how well you take standardized tests. Pre-grad school is a measure of how well you deal with pre-grad school. Postgrad is a little more wild-and-wooley.

There is no 'one size fits all' but like the real world of resumes and job interviews, there has to be some means to sort the wheat from the chaff. There has to be a reason to tell 95% of all applicants to get lost. Hence, tests. Not terribly meaningful, not terribly fair. But they're a filter like anything else in one's career.
 
2012-09-25 09:19:34 PM
The_Original_Roxtar:

I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.

I'm gonna ask... HOW many books do you have out for kiddos to grab?

/ am guessing you don't have kids, so the active role bit is humor.
 
2012-09-25 09:25:50 PM

maxheck: The_Original_Roxtar:

I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.

I'm gonna ask... HOW many books do you have out for kiddos to grab?

/ am guessing you don't have kids, so the active role bit is humor.


My kid had lots of books available, we read to her every night, CC turned on the TV, even had a children's version of the Iliad (Which she loved).
 
2012-09-25 09:29:40 PM

maxheck: The_Original_Roxtar:

I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.

I'm gonna ask... HOW many books do you have out for kiddos to grab?

/ am guessing you don't have kids, so the active role bit is humor.


you're right. I don't have kids. What I do have is a lot of friends who are teachers. Invariably, they tell me that the kids who do poorly and have trouble learning are the same kids whose parents never show up to conferences, don't return phone calls about the fact that little timmy is struggling, etc.

I also have a niece and 2 nephews. I read with them, I solve puzzles with them, I challenge their intellect whenever possible.

oh, i get it now... you're one of those "YOU'RE NOT A PARENT SO YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OPINION!!!111" idiots. yes, your ability to have unprotected sex clearly makes you an expert on child rearing.
 
2012-09-25 09:37:03 PM

maxheck: citoriman:

Kimothy: Maybe if the SAT and ACT actually tested what they claim to test, this wouldn't matter.

They claim they test "college readiness" but white males outscore every other group, but white females graduate from college at the highest rate. If this test really tested "college readiness" women would outscore men.

All tests have built in biases - this one definitely favors mid to upper middle class white people.

I think the real value of the SAT/ACT regarding college readiness is that if you are testing in the bottom or upper 20% or so, then you probably aren't/are ready for college, respectively. Saying that a 95th percentile student is much more qualified for Harvard than a 85th percentile student, however, gives the test too much credit.

What is truly ridiculous is the General Subject GRE. For those who don't know, it's basically a difficult SAT for getting into grad school. Luckily, I double majored in a physical science and a liberal art so I was well prepared for the exam, but I felt sorry for straight science majors who were suddenly asked to write philosophical essays and read esoteric passages about literature and such. There are subject-specific GRE's, which is great, but for my field (in the sciences) there isn't so we take the general GRE. Luckily it is good for 5 years so you don't have to take it again for your phd if you go straight into it.

Standardized tests are... Measures of how well you take standardized tests. Pre-grad school is a measure of how well you deal with pre-grad school. Postgrad is a little more wild-and-wooley.

There is no 'one size fits all' but like the real world of resumes and job interviews, there has to be some means to sort the wheat from the chaff. There has to be a reason to tell 95% of all applicants to get lost. Hence, tests. Not terribly meaningful, not terribly fair. But they're a filter like anything else in one's career.


Ya, like you said, its a filter. Unfair to some yes, meaningless, no. If you totally blow a standardized test that basically asks you to read something, then answer questions about what you just read, chances are you will be a challenging employee to train and manage, or a difficult student to teach. Likewise, a 99th percentile examinee is simply going to succeed in school. We live, work, and study in a standardized world, so an instrument that checks to see how well you perform on a standardized task is pretty useful.
 
2012-09-25 09:43:16 PM

Nutsac_Jim: simplicimus: 12349876: jimmyjackfunk: I never took the SAT in school but took the ACT. Has it changed so much since 1989 that you have to pay even for practice tests now?

Yes, and they're expensive. And there's a whole industry of tutors that will spend several hours teaching your precious snowflake the test. If you have the money.

Ah, yes. Teaching to the test is truly the way to gain an education.

yes, its far better to make them feel good about their D than to teach what is going to be on a test.

That's all that happens in the real world, after all. Bosses telling their workers that failing is ok as long as they tried. Being able to produce, that's not wanted.


OK, I never raised that point, but let's talk: No, feeling good about low scores is not good. Production is of course the desired result of employment. But I will say, having a B.A and a B.S. sent me out as a wolf amongst sheep in the business world.
 
2012-09-25 09:46:42 PM
simplicimus:

maxheck: The_Original_Roxtar:

I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.

I'm gonna ask... HOW many books do you have out for kiddos to grab?

/ am guessing you don't have kids, so the active role bit is humor.

My kid had lots of books available, we read to her every night, CC turned on the TV, even had a children's version of the Iliad (Which she loved).


I love reading aloud, heck, when I hit an exceptionally good passage I do it even without an audience. And I love reading aloud to my nieces and nephews, making a new voice for each character... I do not have a voice for radio, but... And I've found that every girlfriend I've been with loves being read aloud to, because... Duh! It's wonderful!

Now, I'm not gonna say you should read aloud to the ones you love every chance you get, but... :)
 
2012-09-25 09:48:40 PM
citoriman

Ya, like you said, its a filter. Unfair to some yes, meaningless, no. If you totally blow a standardized test that basically asks you to read something, then answer questions about what you just read, chances are you will be a challenging employee to train and manage, or a difficult student to teach. Likewise, a 99th percentile examinee is simply going to succeed in school. We live, work, and study in a standardized world, so an instrument that checks to see how well you perform on a standardized task is pretty useful.

Well, if you read too slowly or are too stupid to re-read the test during the test, you probably won't succeed.
 
2012-09-25 09:56:13 PM
The_Original_Roxtar:

maxheck: The_Original_Roxtar:

I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.

I'm gonna ask... HOW many books do you have out for kiddos to grab?

/ am guessing you don't have kids, so the active role bit is humor.

you're right. I don't have kids. What I do have is a lot of friends who are teachers. Invariably, they tell me that the kids who do poorly and have trouble learning are the same kids whose parents never show up to conferences, don't return phone calls about the fact that little timmy is struggling, etc.

I also have a niece and 2 nephews. I read with them, I solve puzzles with them, I challenge their intellect whenever possible.

oh, i get it now... you're one of those "YOU'RE NOT A PARENT SO YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OPINION!!!111" idiots. yes, your ability to have unprotected sex clearly makes you an expert on child rearing.


I hope that response was just as sarcastic as the post I made that elicited it.

/ don't get me started about the current "fark teachers" movement.
 
2012-09-25 10:19:49 PM
As a Special Ed teacher I'll say this.....college is not for everybody. I sit in IEP meetings where kids who have no business in college are told "you can do it." While that makes a great war cry at the district office the reality is most of my kids should not be told they can go to college, i tell them "if you don't like this high school thing you really aren't going to like college. If you decide to go to community college why don't you check out some auto mechanics or some HVAC or some plumbing." Seriously, if you can't do fractions and you can't identify where to use punctuation you probably aren't going to meet that goal of becoming an engineer, so let's be honest about it.
 
2012-09-25 10:25:42 PM

Kimothy: Maybe if the SAT and ACT actually tested what they claim to test, this wouldn't matter.

They claim they test "college readiness" but white males outscore every other group, but white females graduate from college at the highest rate. If this test really tested "college readiness" women would outscore men.

All tests have built in biases - this one definitely favors mid to upper middle class white people.


That's because we're the smartest people in America statistically speaking.
 
2012-09-25 10:37:05 PM

Kimothy: Maybe if the SAT and ACT actually tested what they claim to test, this wouldn't matter.

They claim they test "college readiness" but white males outscore every other group, but white females graduate from college at the highest rate. If this test really tested "college readiness" women would outscore men.

All tests have built in biases - this one definitely favors mid to upper middle class white people.


I wonder if it has to do with the male majority in STEM degrees where the professor in STEM 100 does the whole "Look to your left, look to your right, only one of you will graduate" and means it vs the women majority majors that have higher graduation rates.

/No stats to back it up, but I know a lot of guys who dropped out of engineering
//I don't know any girls who dropped out of teaching, fine arts, etc.
 
2012-09-25 11:01:21 PM

The_Original_Roxtar: I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.


Sure, thats correct -but what kind of political message is to be derived from that line of thinking?
 
2012-09-25 11:03:34 PM

Frederick: The_Original_Roxtar: I put the blame solely on parents no longer taking an active role in their child(ren)'s education.

Sure, thats correct -but what kind of political message is to be derived from that line of thinking?


Parent Up? Not going to fly with either party.
 
2012-09-25 11:10:32 PM
Why would SAT be reading scores? Does it like music? wait.. nevermind, I read that right.
 
2012-09-25 11:11:17 PM
I had no idea that "television" was another way to say 'unions'.

Congrats unions. You've set us back 40 years.

But hey, there are plenty of other professions where you can't get fired just because you are incompetent, amiright?
 
2012-09-25 11:12:37 PM

dkimball: Why would SAT be reading scores? Does it like music? wait.. nevermind, I read that right.


Hey, at least they could test the kids on the keys in G clef.
 
2012-09-25 11:13:38 PM

SevenizGud: I had no idea that "television" was another way to say 'unions'.

Congrats unions. You've set us back 40 years.

But hey, there are plenty of other professions where you can't get fired just because you are incompetent, amiright?


Well, Congress springs to mind.
 
2012-09-25 11:23:12 PM

You're the jerk... jerk: the money is in the banana stand: I believe that the SATs are a terrible indicator of intelligence. I am not a fan of standardized testing of any sort. There are vast amounts of subjects not even covered by the SATs. You have Math and Reading (I guess there is a Composition portion nowadays too). Never mind the fact that the scope of material for both are "odd" to say the least and not very broad, there are tons of subject matters not even addressed by the test. I have never understood the purpose of the SATs. I agree with you on the topic of inputs, the more affluent schools will have parents that give a damn, or are in a position to help their children succeed which will affect the scores - not necessarily that the quality of education is lower.

The SAT does a relatively good job at predicting what it is intended to predict (freshman college performance). Even though schools only admit within a narrow band of SAT scores the variation generally explains 10-20% of the variation in grades. It actually over predicts the performance of some groups (men and URMs), this is especially interesting for URMs because that would indicate the test is biased towards those groups.

Do you think more affluent parents only bring environmental factors? Is there a genetic disposition?


I think there is an enormous genetic disposition in addition to the environmental factors. My father is a tremendous artist and musician. I inherited his artistic abilities, and my younger brother is a phenomenal bass guitar player. What would happen if neither of us discovered these abilities and did not practice them? Would our progeny no longer have these abilities? How does that work? What if we practiced a lot in something we were not naturally inclined to do? Would that be genetically passed down?
 
2012-09-25 11:31:47 PM
I am shocked...just...shocked...to learn that stupid people are poor. You don't say.
 
2012-09-25 11:31:51 PM

smitty04:
media.northjersey.com 

Successful parents have successful kids, but is it due to inheritance on environmental?


Interesting chart - and my family's income probably was 40K or so when I got my 1450.

/But when I took it, the maximum score was 1600, and the chart is based on maximum 2400.
//730M 720V, bringing balance to the force...
 
2012-09-25 11:52:03 PM
They pretty much say why in the article - a larger percentage of minority and ELL students taking the test. And a validity coefficient of .40 is pretty damn good. Probably would be higher if corrected for range restriction.
 
2012-09-26 03:18:30 AM

Aarontology: You can't blame television when a significant portion of the population things ignorance is something to be lauded and that education is inherently evil.


Can't blame television either when the kids are getting bored with the subject matter either.

/Got repeat after repeat until 12th grade.
 
2012-09-26 03:21:42 AM

KidneyStone: Rambino: TV? Not TV's fault. I blame:

1. Home schooling
2. Fox News
3. Fluoride in the water
4. Vaccines
5. Cell phones
6. The Iraq war

You forgot Poland


Funny, I blame:

1: Public education
2: Poor Parenting
3: Lack of good role models
4: Standardized tests
5: CNN/FOX/MSNBC/et al
 
2012-09-26 03:27:13 AM

People_are_Idiots: Aarontology: You can't blame television when a significant portion of the population things ignorance is something to be lauded and that education is inherently evil.

Can't blame television either when the kids are getting bored with the subject matter either.

/Got repeat after repeat until 12th grade.


I was actively involved in my daughter's education, pushing an old classical education, reading, music, German, philosophy and busy correcting what was in the Texas Curricula. I'm not saying I'm wonderful, just that parenting is more than handing your kid off to the school system.
 
2012-09-26 03:49:57 AM

simplicimus: People_are_Idiots: Aarontology: You can't blame television when a significant portion of the population things ignorance is something to be lauded and that education is inherently evil.

Can't blame television either when the kids are getting bored with the subject matter either.

/Got repeat after repeat until 12th grade.

I was actively involved in my daughter's education, pushing an old classical education, reading, music, German, philosophy and busy correcting what was in the Texas Curricula. I'm not saying I'm wonderful, just that parenting is more than handing your kid off to the school system.


I agree there too, but when parents don't do it, it is up to the schools, and they don't actively engage their minds.
 
2012-09-26 03:54:33 AM

People_are_Idiots: simplicimus: People_are_Idiots: Aarontology: You can't blame television when a significant portion of the population things ignorance is something to be lauded and that education is inherently evil.

Can't blame television either when the kids are getting bored with the subject matter either.

/Got repeat after repeat until 12th grade.

I was actively involved in my daughter's education, pushing an old classical education, reading, music, German, philosophy and busy correcting what was in the Texas Curricula. I'm not saying I'm wonderful, just that parenting is more than handing your kid off to the school system.

I agree there too, but when parents don't do it, it is up to the schools, and they don't actively engage their minds.


I'm sorry to agree (no offense to you meant), but you speak the truth.
 
2012-09-26 04:50:47 AM

People_are_Idiots: I agree there too, but when parents don't do it, it is up to the schools, and they don't actively engage their minds.


You can expect the schools to prepare your kids roughly as well as they prepare all the other future subjects of Fark headlines tagged [Fail] or [Dumbass]. If you want your kids to be [Cool] or [Spiffy] or anything else good, or show up in things linked from the Business, Geek or Politics tabs, or best of all be able to write headlines that go green... you'd better be supplementing what they get in school.
 
2012-09-26 04:56:02 AM

dbirchall: People_are_Idiots: I agree there too, but when parents don't do it, it is up to the schools, and they don't actively engage their minds.

You can expect the schools to prepare your kids roughly as well as they prepare all the other future subjects of Fark headlines tagged [Fail] or [Dumbass]. If you want your kids to be [Cool] or [Spiffy] or anything else good, or show up in things linked from the Business, Geek or Politics tabs, or best of all be able to write headlines that go green... you'd better be supplementing what they get in school.


Preaching to the choir, bub.
 
2012-09-26 09:30:21 AM
Its ok, its just a standardized test and we all know they are bunk, teachers unions telll me so.
 
2012-09-26 09:47:45 AM

dbirchall: People_are_Idiots: I agree there too, but when parents don't do it, it is up to the schools, and they don't actively engage their minds.

You can expect the schools to prepare your kids roughly as well as they prepare all the other future subjects of Fark headlines tagged [Fail] or [Dumbass]. If you want your kids to be [Cool] or [Spiffy] or anything else good, or show up in things linked from the Business, Geek or Politics tabs, or best of all be able to write headlines that go green... you'd better be supplementing what they get in school.


And again, it comes to the involvement of the parents' raising their children. Problem is a lot of the time the child's parent -becomes- the TV, and with the plethora of shows out there that kids shouldn't watch, the mind easily becomes mush. Heck, back in my day we had comic books made from the original book, so kids would read it and understand. Do kids have an equivalent?

/used to love reading War of the Worlds, Time Machine, Wuthering Heights, etc...
 
2012-09-26 10:53:59 AM

OgreMagi: From what I saw, every problem ever caused in the world was caused by the white man. If you look at the books from a woman studies class, every problem ever caused in the world was caused by men. I would not do well in either class since I have a habit of calling out bullshiat when I see it. Did that in my polisci class in college when the teacher stated something that was easily proven false. I almost failed because of that.


I'm the libbiest of libs, but I've got to concede that there is some major exaggeration going on these days in academia. I've seen some college textbooks in the last few years, in fields like sociology and history, that contained some whopping lies. When I told one young woman that she should dispute some of the course material, she said that the professor was adament about these points, and that there was no room for debate - she would flunk if she didn't parrot the "party line".

I'm glad I went to college in the 1970s, when things were apparently less polarized or there was more opportunity for contradicting the teacher.
 
2012-09-26 11:00:47 AM

OgreMagi: simon_bar_sinister: On a side note, did anyone else notice the links to other articles below this one?
"How not to sound racist when talking about black studies" is it possible to not sound racist, even if you are black? I got a look at the required books for that course. (Did used books as a sideline for a couple of years.) That stuff is truly racist.
Aggressively point out what dead people did. Accuse contemporaries of same activities. The louder the better. Demand compensation.

From what I saw, every problem ever caused in the world was caused by the white man. If you look at the books from a woman studies class, every problem ever caused in the world was caused by men. I would not do well in either class since I have a habit of calling out bullshiat when I see it. Did that in my polisci class in college when the teacher stated something that was easily proven false. I almost failed because of that.


No surprise there. Its all the fault of EVIL WHITE MEN! Everything from the beginning of time. Unless its something good, then its women, minorities or sky wizards.
 
2012-09-26 12:37:54 PM

Aarontology: You can't blame television when a significant portion of the population things ignorance is something to be lauded and that education is inherently evil.


and I am hoping your misspelling is an attempt to be ironic in such a post about reading and writing

LOL
 
2012-09-27 02:21:03 AM
The juxtaposition of this headline with the three banner ads all running on replay and non-stop for the last three days about the new WoW expansion is the very definition of irony.
 
Displayed 45 of 145 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report