<p><a href="epiphany%20wrote:">quote</a> I don't think a lot of people are listening to you on this particular mission of yours, siserune. Maybe it's because too many of us know students who don't fit the "predictions" you believe must be true.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your need to do more quoting and less fabrication. What I "believe must be true" is that, given two large and otherwise mostly equal populations with a significant SAT difference between them (what counts as significant will decrease with population size), the one with higher SATs will tend to perform better and the one with lower SATs will tend to perform worse. This is not controversial and it is in fact borne out by some of the same studies advertised as showing the irrelevance of SAT. I strongly suspect that this is the case for the study hinted at by mini, but will await further information from her, if she has it. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Either that, or the Elites are doing a terrible job of selecting, aren't they? In any case, my above 75% (in one area) child and below 25% in another tested area is doing beautifully at an Elite (including in that 25% area) and would laugh at you for indicating she might be a "retention problem."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Show us where I claimed a "retention problem". Quote what I wrote, not what you have fabricated. </p>
<p>
[quote]
It's also possible to be outside the 25% & 75% areas & still be a National Merit Finalist. (Mine was.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>25 and 75 percent of what? For non-minority NMF's (i.e. excluding minority-specific designations such as National Achievement Scholar), it is rare to get it without top SAT's except perhaps in noncompetitive states where you don't have to make the commendation cutoff to be a finalist.</p>