Racism in standardized testing

ACT and SAT math testing doesnt include math you have never seen. And the Jr and High school math assesments I was refering to wouldnt either. Hardley seems relevant.

Youll find similar racial disparities in test scores within the SAME school. Same classes.

 

A high IQ is not that important, I think wisdom is more important, and if the two reside in the same person, it's a coincidence.

 

I want the guy who designs my bridges to have a high IQ. I don't care about wisdom.

 

That's the how, you need someone with wisdom for the when, where and what.

 

And how does one measure "how far you can go" absent any testing?

 

A man with high IQ can build an exquisite bridge, but a man without wisdom will build a bridge to nowhere.

Wisdom is extremely important.

George Bush had a high IQ, but was the war in IRAQ wise?

He was smart enough to persuade congress to go along with his scheme, most of whom were intelligent, but were they wise?

High IQ men designed the federal reserve and the fractional banking system, but it has raised prices from a time when a house could be purchased for $2k and today it costs $500k, so were they wise? For the bankers they were wise, but for the rest of us, they were not wise.

High IQ men brought us electricity, and Tesla, a wise man, was overruled by an intelligent banker who wouldn't allow Tesla's free energy technology to be known to the world, as you can't put a meter on free energy, so was the banker wise?

An IQ test cannot measure wisdom, so are it's designers wise?

Do not underestimate the value of wisdom.

One musician knows 3 chords but 10,000 people love his music, enough for him to earn a living.

Another musician knows 10,000 chords, but only 3 people love his music, not enough to earn a living from music.

Which musician is wiser?

THe answer depends on how we are measuring wisdom, what the measuring stick is aligned to.

If money is the key to wisdom, the musician who knew 3 chords was wiser.

However, a wise man knows that the key to wisdom is not money ('per se').

Therefore, neither was the wiser.

Wisdom cannot be, therefore, easily measured, which is why IQ tests cannot measure it.

 

Let's add fuel to your sentiment, amplify it with intellectual steroids, and the fellow who does that the best is Trump, who proclaimed:

We will root out the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, and Radical Left Thugs that live like
vermin within the confines of our country, lie, steal, and cheat on elections, and will do
anything possible, whether legally or illegally to destroy America, and the American Dream"

Is that a wise choice of words for a Presidential candidate?

In my view, intelligence is not as important as wisdom.

But, let me be clear, I do not claim to be wise.

I'm a bit tickled by old friend, Socrates, who understood that the only thing he
absolutely knew for certain was absolutely nothing, but his wisdom is
still being employed in law schools throughout America.

 

Currently there is no way to do that in a way that is not ethnically biased. However, universities MUST make a selection. And SAT and other scores are fine (in my opinion) so long as, after the testing, they also account for ethnic bias. Which, I believe, is actually what they do NOW.

It's not perfect, but I can't think of a better way to do this pending the birth of Hari Seldon and until we can perfect Psychohistory.

 

I don't get the "ethnically biased" part. SAT's and ACT's are knowledge based; it's material that either should be covered in high school or covered in AP courses. I'm not buying the saucer/cup distinction that this OP is ostensibly about.

So I really don't get how Universities would account for ethnic bias.

 

The most famous question in SAT comes to mind


Which was correctly answered (C) by over 50% of white students, but only around 23% of blacks. I guess black people should pay more attention in their High School Yachting class.

You can "buy" whatever you want. Fact is that scientific analysis have shown that there is bias in these tests.

 

That's absurd. Are you telling me that white people's ethnicity is why they use or know certain words? Did you have a high school yachting class? I sure didn't, and there wasn't a yacht or regatta anywhere near me growing up.

But I read books and knew words, even words about things that were not directly outside of my bedroom window.

Good grief, if this is what you think is an example of "ethnically biased" I honestly don't know what to say to that. Just admit you hate tests and don't want any testing.

Or better yet, give me an example of an SAT question that those black students you mentioned would know but their paler, yacht owning fellow students wouldn't?

 

Sorry. But I never attended a regatta and the only reason I knew what it was in HS was because I watched movies. Summer Rental

Should the SAT have an Ebonics version and the top score only 1000? And you wonder why people might question when someone gets hired, then they speak, and you start thinking, How the **** did YOU pass the interview?

 

Bingo!

Hah! Funny joke! (I hope)

 

Exactly the point! Poor black kids are less likely to rent Regata movies. In fact, they're less likely to own a DVD to watch rentals WITH.

 

Not exactly a Regata movie, hehe. Just a goofy John Candy comedy from the 80s, that had a boat race.

Plenty of poor WHITE families that can’t afford DVDs either

 

Editing out my reply to avoid responding is an answer of it's own.

 

But I did respond. I said "Bingo!". That means "yes". People's ethnicity, which includes their socio-economic level, IS a factor that so-called standardized tests aren't standardized for.

 

That's a hypothesis, but your evidence about regatta's and saucers in no way made that case.

 

According to who?
South Korea, us, and other countries are pulling such tests for this reason.

 

It only makes my case before anybody who understands that people who have never heard of regattas, or who never used saucers at home, are less likely to identify them in a standardized test. To most people it would be too obvious for me to even NEED to make the case. This is my target audience.

 

And the reason is...?

 

You mean your target audience is people who already think like you. Therefore you don't need an argument or evidence. You need to only say "saucers" on your target audience will smile knowingly, "..and regattas."

That's fine. However outside your "target audience" it sounds like an absurd proposition.

 

Irrelevance.
They're irrelevant for their purpose.

 

Of course

 

I'm always amazed how you seem to think race doesn't exist. While the concept is somewhat ambiguous, it's also definitive in people's perceptions. That may or may not lead to what you think is prejudice.
I agree that cultures have a great deal to do with defining the way people act, but cultures and race tend to have remarkable parallels.

The idea we will come to the point we don't recognize racial differences is fantasy. That doesn't mean we will always tie the same characteristics to that identity- but where those do exist, they will be recognized and will enter into our perceptions of people. That is not racism, it's common logic and human nature. The prominent conduct of any recognizable group will eventually be associated with that group proportionately.
In order for us to see race as being no more a definition of people than characteristics like eye or hair color, the conduct has to be basically equivalent. Where it's not, humans do what they should do- recognize, evaluate, and discriminate. If the conduct aligns with obvious markers, that will become the common denominator.

If 50% of dog bites were inflicted by black dogs, compared to all other dogs put together- You are going to stay away from black dogs you don't know and be more aware of potential hostility with those you do.
If that is true, ignoring it is foolish. In the end- Conduct defines us. It defines the individual, thus in all races, we have standouts, people whose contributions to society shine like stars. However, the composite identity of that group is going to be defined by the group overall. Neither government nor society can erase what people see. Conduct defines us- first individually, and as a group collectively. Wise people recognize the presence of various elements in the group- but still recognize the comprehensive nature of it. Regardless of the why, a condition that is true can't be ignored.

When I was a little kid, I watched as a black burglar was arrested and put into a patrol car. The lead police officer was a black Sargent. The burglar said- "Why you doin this to me? you a n****r just like me"
The Sargent said "No- I'm a man that happens to be black. You are a N****r." My father explained later, that it was the choices people make, the values they live by, that make them what they are. And the names aren't responsible for the conduct- the conduct is responsible for the name. They are just labels for a common denominator.

People have the ability to control their choices and conduct. Define themselves. While conditions make that easier or more difficult, it is always there. Regardless of your color, to me- what you do is who you are. Society may contrive names and ways to categorize people, but that is not what makes them who they are- unless they are unwilling to define themselves individually.