<p>Ferny Reyes, you're just like simba, playing that pathetic race card to get your point across. Didn't you read..I'm asian...and yes I grew up in the rampart district of Los Angeles, one of the most crime-ridden areas in the country. </p>
<p>Sorry, you as well, now have very little credibility...</p>
<p>And by the way, we're not talking about your individual accomplishments...that's just you...you're not the center of this discussion. IN GENERAL, what I've pointed out is difficult to refute. It's amazing how some people just can't get this basic point across in their thick, egotistical, heads.</p>
<p>Then I'll shift the topic to this:</p>
<p>Why not revise the SAT so it's more curriculum based, which would be, imo, a better indication of 1. what you've really learned in high school, 2. a better predictor of college grades?</p>
<p>Assuming, a fair test fitting those parameters is devised...</p>
<p>that exam would be called the ACT.</p>
<p>firewalker, I believe those curriculum based tests are called SAT II's and AP. The problem with your plan is that Collegeboard would then define the high school curriculum, which might not be the best thing. And further, as not all high schools offer classes like Calculus or require any particular text, it is inherently unfair to raise the curriculum bar. The SAT is a curriculum based test; it justs tests at a very low level in an effort to be "fair." And in order for top students to miss these low level questions, the SAT relies on "verbal conundrums and math puzzles."</p>
<p>Who says it has to be higher in curriculum? Can't it stay similar to the current level on the SAT? I think that's reasonable. The reason why it does a poor job predicting college grades is just that; the content of the test has little relevance to curriculum studied in college...</p>
<p>The problem with your "test based on curriculum" is that this test would be more studyable, thus give an even greater advantage to those who can afford tutors and those who do not have to work to help pay rent...besides the fact all curriculums are differant....</p>
<p>I believe that the greater correlation between HS GPA and 1st year college GPA vs. SAT score and 1st year college GPA is statistically valid, which makes weighing HS GPA more heavily than SATs a legitimate policy for a state school, as UC has determined. I also think (based solely on anecdotal evidence) that GPA more accurately measures work ethic and the SAT more closely tracks natural intellectual talent. From what I see, students whose GPA vs. SAT skews towards the tests - e.g. 3.5 GPA with a 2100 SAT - are likely to be smart but lazy and those who skew towards grades - e.g. 4.0 with an 1800 - tend to be more diligent. More diligent high school students will tend to have higher GPAs their first year in college. Makes sense to me.</p>
<p>But it seems like a college would want to have a pretty good selection of smart high school underachievers too. Their 1st year college GPA's may not impress, but they may end up as the kind of alumni that a college would want to have. Just my 2 cents worth.</p>
<p>No, Truman64, before you attempt to belitlttle your opponent, stop and reread the passage.</p>
<p>I'm saying I made it through. Generally, however, did I not say that you had to work harder, sacrifice more to do remotely as well as those in prosperous socioeconomic situations?</p>
<p>Did I not get this fact through? You want to base the SAT as flawed, that's fine. All it does is paint the true socioeconomic and racial relations of this nation. I'm not saying it's fair for minorities. I'm saying life isn't fair for minorities.</p>
<p>That's the truth. If you are poor, you have to work harder to do anything.</p>
<p>That's life. Now, if you somehow didn't get that point across in my point, perhaps you didn't do as hot in the SAT as you think, yes?</p>
<p>Now that's a debate tactic :)</p>
<p>I wonder how great SAT I scores would predict GPA if GPA trends (in different fields) were taking into account. Some fields receive harsher grading curves than others. If the average GPA in say, engineering, is a lot lower than the average GPA in say, political science, does anyone see how the SAT as a predictor of college GPA takes this into account at all?</p>
<p>cjh...with that being said, it wouldn't seem like that big of a change from now...</p>
<p>Did you notice his use of the word "greater?" In addition, the comment about curricula being "different" is also a change, and he implied more variance than currently. So unless it makes things better, why change it?</p>
<p>Here's the point that stuck out to me MOST in the article (and the source of like...80% of the arguments on this forum, weather raced based or gender based...)</p>
<p>
[quote]
No American male is offended at being told that, no matter how hard he practiced, he could never be Michael Jordan, or, indeed, a starting player in the NBA. Yet the thought that many students with good study habits and high aspirations do not have what it takes to do the work at Harvard or Berkeley remains a source of deep discomfort.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why is it so hard to picture that there could possibly be natural genetic differences in mental ability/the way a person processes information when we so readily accept a difference in people's physical performance based on gender, race, or family background?</p>
<p>I went to a medicore public high school. Only a minority of graduates go to any college and virtually all of them go to the a community college or state university. I worked hard in high school and got a very good GPA. However, I doubt the adcoms at Johns Hopkins had ever heard of my high school. My SAT score verified my high school GPA. Without the SAT top univerisities would be filled with kids from the like of Andover and Bronx Science to the exclusion of smart kids like. The SAT gives disadvantged students an oppurtunity to compete with those from wealthy backgrounds.</p>
<p>"Why is it so hard to picture that there could possibly be natural genetic differences in mental ability/the way a person processes information when we so readily accept a difference in people's physical performance based on gender, race, or family background?"</p>
<p>Because it is easy to attribute your failure in those areas to external factors. Failure in SAT to a large extent depends on YOU. It is very hard to take personal resposibilities.</p>
<p>Bill<em>h</em>pike....</p>
<p>That is the exact same argument I made in a post on a previous page. The SAT helps even the playing field because no matter what high school you attend, the SAT allows admissions people to accurately compare students from all over the country and the world. GPA really means nothing unless it is validated by one of several things. One would be the admissions people being familiar with your high school because many talented students have applied there in the past and the school is well known. However, many high schools do not have this advantage. That's where standardized tests - SATs, SAT Subject Tests, and APs - can validate a high GPA.</p>
<p>"Why the hell not talk to someone that is poor and goes to a crap ass school?"</p>
<p>"I swear, I love it when well-off white people talk about the poor man's problems ^_^"</p>
<p>Ferny Reyes,</p>
<p>"Attempting to belittle your opponent"? You need to reread your post and see that you belittled yourself by playing the race card, as shown above. As I told simba, in a forum such as this, where far too many people are educated and reasonable, once you play the race card, you really can't be taken seriously. </p>
<p>Your message WASN'T CLEAR on your post. You tried to put me down when you thought I was "white" while stating your point of view regarding the issue of the SAT, which was essentially THE SAME as mine. How consistent is that? </p>
<p>Along with that, you toot your own horn by blabbing about what you've accomplished in spite of your deprived background. Your post was coming from left field, right field and center field...absolutely no consistency in your message. Basically, you just posted regarding this issue to blab about what YOU'VE accomplished. Get over yourself.</p>
<p>And Spartan and simba, again, you need to ask this basic question to yourself, WOULD YOU WANT TO GIVE UP YOUR CHILD TO AN UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS OR LOWER MIDDLE-CLASSS FAMILY?? In what situation would you hedge to bet they'll be more successful academically, SAT's and all. If you can't comprehend this extremely basic point, then I really don't know what to say. </p>
<p>Something like being able to play like Michael Jordan vs. the average player has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. What a weak argument. That's like saying, "not everybody can be the physicist Einstein was, everybody just doesn't have that kind of ablilty". This sports analogy doesn't exactly translate to academcs does it? Only a select few make it as an NBA player. Talk about having to make it into an exclusive club. Not the case, for the most part, in academics.</p>
<p>"And Spartan and simba, again, you need to ask this basic question to yourself, WOULD YOU WANT TO GIVE UP YOUR CHILD TO AN UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS OR LOWER MIDDLE-CLASSS FAMILY??"</p>
<p>That is a moranic question to ask a parent. Most parents would never give up their child. You need to rent Sophie's Choice to understand how it feels to give up a child.</p>
<p>Young man grow up - stop blaming other things for your shortcomings.</p>
<p>"That's like saying, "not everybody can be the physicist Einstein was, everybody just doesn't have that kind of ablilty". </p>
<p>That is very true - not everybody can ever be Einstein.</p>
<p>The question was, READ IT....in what situation would you think they would have more success academically, SAT's and all? If you can't answer that basic question, then you're hopeless. </p>
<p>And what the heck is your point about Einstein. If you don't want to come off as some kind of idiot, then respond with some degree of reason or intellect.</p>
<p>For a national standard for comparing GPAs at Easy Academy to those at Hard Knocks High School is so necessary, why can't SAT II and AP exams play the role INSTEAD of the SAT I? At least the SAT II and AP exams are based on the material students are SUPPOSED to study instead of whether or not the student uses the Princeton Review's slick tricks.</p>