Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (65376)	1/10/2003 9:26:16 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hey, guys, I don't wanna be a wet blanket, but aren't race and IQ OT, too? (My "clever"/"heavy handed" way of saying I disagree with you, and want to argue with you, but don't think FL will go for it.)

To: LindyBill who wrote (65376)	1/11/2003 12:54:05 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

What is a better predictor of college performance than SAT scores? Oh, high school grades for one. Check, Bill, with any admissions officer at any university which depends heavily on some mix of quantitative and qualitative scores to determine who to admit. They will tell you they rely on high schools grades (obviously, a quantitative measure that can be used as a predictor of college grades) and recommendations (obviously, a qualitative measure that cannot) more than SAT scores. SAT scores simply test test making ability. It is clearly an ability but not the only one that is important for good college work and, in some admissions officers minds, not even the best one. I think the California public system, for one, though I'm not certain, planned to experiment with simply dropping requests for SAT scores on their admission materials. And guess what? If they don't have the SATs, they do not do as well either. You would have to cite some research here, Bill, to make that point. It's a straightforward bit of research, the kind that, most likely, appears in all sorts of education journals. Have fun. They are among the most boring journals one can examine. Moreover, admissions officers will tell you that "doing well in college" is more than making good grades and thus the decision as to whether to admit a specific student is a very complicated one involving lots of variables. It's not SAT scores or SAT scores plus minority status. It's much more nuanced. One can argue with the nuancing since it introduces lots of room for mischief of all sorts. But to characterize the admissions process as simply SAT plus skin color is wrong. As for the summary of the three points from Sowell, if he's seriously making those charges in an intellectual sense rather than making political points, the needs to document them. Refer to the review literature on the Bok and Bowen book. Find where those same criticisms have been made, B & B's response to those criticisms, and then include those in a "fair and balanced" op ed piece. As it stands now Sowell is simply politically one sided. I am not charging Sowell made the charges up; what I'm saying is that he has written a political document, not an analysis of the Bok and Bowen argument. We live, unfortunately, in a time in which the confusion between the two is rampant so Sowell goes unchallenged. He could be correct in his charge; he could be wrong. But he has an intellectual obligation to (a) place his comments in the context of the literature, and (b) make certain that his readers know how B & B responded to his criticisms. But these kind of numbers that he has talked about are real, and are going to result in a change in the law, IMO. Well, you could easily be right about the latter, a change in the law but it won't because of good scholarship but rather because of the right wing slant of the present court. Bill, I think you would agree that we are way off topic here for FADG. I'm through. I've said my say. If you have more, type away but I will try to resist any sort of reply.