i guess i'm confused by this. i've heard the argument, but don't buy it. also, any student regardless of finances can be fairly well prepped with online videos, whether free or for a nominal fee. i think there is an argument they aren't effective; many who choke on these types of tests were and go on to be excellent students. there are downsides to any selection process.
There are valid arguments for all sides and there certainly are always downsides to any selection processes. It almost seems impossible to arrive at a "fair" standard when everyone judged by it is so different on so many levels, but a varying number of people are given that task to varying degrees.
I don't disagree with the points you are making about merit, logic and reason. However, from what I've seen, fewer (not more) colleges than before are requiring or using SAT or ACT as standards for admissions, or using their scores as criteria. One of those tests have been required by almost all colleges for at least the last 40 years. A substantial number of colleges and universities (including the University of California system) have decided to no longer require those tests for admission or to phase out their requirement, and have not just done so because of - or since-the pandemic.
I'm wondering why they are using the standardized tests less? Because they are racist? Because they are not effective? I would argue for the latter.
The colleges and universities have a number of different reasons, some believe they are biased - either racially, culturally or economically, some believe that the results favor wealthier students who can afford to be coached and prepped. Some schools think that "blind" tests like those are too vague - useful but not required.
i guess i'm confused by this. i've heard the argument, but don't buy it. also, any student regardless of finances can be fairly well prepped with online videos, whether free or for a nominal fee. i think there is an argument they aren't effective; many who choke on these types of tests were and go on to be excellent students. there are downsides to any selection process.
I don't disagree with the points you are making about merit, logic and reason. However, from what I've seen, fewer (not more) colleges than before are requiring or using SAT or ACT as standards for admissions, or using their scores as criteria. One of those tests have been required by almost all colleges for at least the last 40 years. A substantial number of colleges and universities (including the University of California system) have decided to no longer require those tests for admission or to phase out their requirement, and have not just done so because of - or since-the pandemic.
I'm wondering why they are using the standardized tests less? Because they are racist? Because they are not effective? I would argue for the latter.
The colleges and universities have a number of different reasons, some believe they are biased - racially, culturally or economically, some believe that the results strongly favor wealthier students who can afford to be coached and prepped. Some schools think that "blind" tests like those are too vague - useful but should not be required.
You have pivoted from merit to societal measures competence? If you want to work in a nail salon in NJ, you need a license...objective standards... but merit?
There are a few comments since yours that basically say "it's America, here are our rules". That's fine, but then own the fact that merit may not be the deciding factor. Most people who have "achieved" some measure of success feel like they earned it and anyone else could have done the same thing. That is simply untrue. It works both ways...for and against...but if you're white in the US you've had an easier path through the "meritocracy". If you don't think so, you're not applying logic and reason. There is no need to apologize for exploiting that advantage, but ignoring it, or worse rejecting it, doesn't eliminate it.
We don't need to beat this to death... I'm sure I'm missing something... I was just surprised to see logic and reason used as statements to impune the woman's statement of racism, when in fact bias and racism have provided the facts for logic and reason support her position.
If you truly believe in merit, eliminating the SAT should upset you. Those making admission decisions at colleges accept that more and more every year. Why argue with them?
I don't disagree with the points you are making about merit, logic and reason. However, from what I've seen, fewer (not more) colleges than before are requiring or using SAT or ACT as standards for admissions, or using their scores as criteria. One of those tests have been required by almost all colleges for at least the last 40 years. A substantial number of colleges and universities (including the University of California system) have decided to no longer require those tests for admission or to phase out their requirement, and have not just done so because of - or since-the pandemic.
I'm wondering why they are using the standardized tests less? Because they are racist? Because they are not effective? I would argue for the latter.
You have pivoted from merit to societal measures competence? If you want to work in a nail salon in NJ, you need a license...objective standards... but merit?
There are a few comments since yours that basically say "it's America, here are our rules". That's fine, but then own the fact that merit may not be the deciding factor. Most people who have "achieved" some measure of success feel like they earned it and anyone else could have done the same thing. That is simply untrue. It works both ways...for and against...but if you're white in the US you've had an easier path through the "meritocracy". If you don't think so, you're not applying logic and reason. There is no need to apologize for exploiting that advantage, but ignoring it, or worse rejecting it, doesn't eliminate it.
We don't need to beat this to death... I'm sure I'm missing something... I was just surprised to see logic and reason used as statements to impune the woman's statement of racism, when in fact bias and racism have provided the facts for logic and reason support her position.
If you truly believe in merit, eliminating the SAT should upset you. Those making admission decisions at colleges accept that more and more every year. Why argue with them?
I don't disagree with the points you are making about merit, logic and reason. However, from what I've seen, fewer (not more) colleges than before are requiring or using SAT or ACT as standards for admissions, or using their scores as criteria. One of those tests have been required by almost all colleges for at least the last 40 years. A substantial number of colleges and universities (including the University of California system) have decided to no longer require those tests for admission or to phase out their requirement, and have not just done so because of - or since-the pandemic. Some have suspended its requirement because almost no one was able to test last year because of COVID.
By definition, no. As implemented in "standardized testing", yes.
Ironically, the rejection of logic and reason IS standardized testing...thus my question.
occupational licensing is based on a standardized test
when is the last time you chose a service say for your health or home and didn't seek a standard of competence?
licensed and insured?
we're living in a society based on objective standards of competence
You have pivoted from merit to societal measures competence? If you want to work in a nail salon in NJ, you need a license...objective standards... but merit?
There are a few comments since yours that basically say "it's America, here are our rules". That's fine, but then own the fact that merit may not be the deciding factor. Most people who have "achieved" some measure of success feel like they earned it and anyone else could have done the same thing. That is simply untrue. It works both ways...for and against...but if you're white in the US you've had an easier path through the "meritocracy". If you don't think so, you're not applying logic and reason. There is no need to apologize for exploiting that advantage, but ignoring it, or worse rejecting it, doesn't eliminate it.
We don't need to beat this to death... I'm sure I'm missing something... I was just surprised to see logic and reason used as statements to impune the woman's statement of racism, when in fact bias and racism have provided the facts for logic and reason support her position.
If you truly believe in merit, eliminating the SAT should upset you. Those making admission decisions at colleges accept that more and more every year. Why argue with them?
By definition, no. As implemented in "standardized testing", yes.
Ironically, the rejection of logic and reason IS standardized testing...thus my question.
That depends on which type of "standardized testing" you are referring to; there are hundreds of different assessments which could be called "standardized"; not all of them are based on rote memorization - relatively few are anymore.
By definition, no. As implemented in "standardized testing", yes.
Ironically, the rejection of logic and reason IS standardized testing...thus my question.
occupational licensing is based on a standardized test
when is the last time you chose a service say for your health or home and didn't seek a standard of competence?
licensed and insured?
we're living in a society based on objective standards of competence
Isn't the (false) argument that standardized student testing is racist, something along the lines of they dont take into consideration cultural differences? I don't know how this argument might hold for math or logic sections, but perhaps for the reading/writing comprehension? One culture is more used to the queen's english, used by the standardized tests, than the street slang used by others. but as far as i can tell, even in the neighborhoods that speak more street slang, they are still taught the queen's english in school?
There is a second wave of "wokeness" out there of critical thinkers and intellectuals and just like all other forms of Facism these intellectuals are dangerous to the regime and must be censored or worse. Listen to them while you still can.......or not.
