AnCaps
ANARCHO-CAPITALISTS
Bitch-Slapping Statists For Fun & Profit Based On The Non-Aggression Principle
 
HomePortalGalleryRegisterLog in

 :: Anarcho-Capitalist Categorical Imperatives :: AnCaps & Psychology, Edumbcation, Even IndoctriNation
 

 What ‘Everyone Knows’ about the SAT Is Wrong

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
CovOps

CovOps

Female Location : Ether-Sphere
Job/hobbies : Irrationality Exterminator
Humor : Über Serious

What ‘Everyone Knows’ about the SAT Is Wrong Vide
PostSubject: What ‘Everyone Knows’ about the SAT Is Wrong    What ‘Everyone Knows’ about the SAT Is Wrong Icon_minitimeTue May 28, 2019 8:22 pm
Last week I lamented that the College Board’s new practice of assigning applicants an “adversity score” will perpetuate a widespread myth — that the SAT is biased against students from poor or minority backgrounds. SAT scores predict college performance for underprivileged students about as well as they do for everyone else. To the extent there is a difference, the College Board’s own data show that a high adversity score is associated with slightly lower college grades than testing would predict. The idea that the SAT scores of high-adversity applicants need to be corrected upward to ensure a merit-based system is wrong.

What ‘Everyone Knows’ about the SAT Is Wrong Emptyclassroom-desks

Richard Kahlenberg is apparently not familiar with this evidence. Writing for The Atlantic, he argues that the adversity score is “a quantitative counterpoint to the SAT” that will improve merit-based admissions:
Quote :
…[An] adversity score offers colleges some way to acknowledge what everyone knows: A student who scored 1200 on the SAT despite having grown up in a high-crime neighborhood and attending high-poverty schools has more long-run potential than a student who earned 1200 while having access to the best private schools and paid tutors.
Kahlenberg supports this claim not with data, but only with the insistence that “everyone knows” it’s true. In reality, the claim is too vague to evaluate. What does “long-run potential” mean? It cannot mean college performance, because we know that the SAT predicts about as well for the underprivileged as it does for the privileged. If anything, the underprivileged perform below expectations, not above.
Maybe “more long-run potential” refers to economic and social success after college? If so, Kahlenberg would have us believe that once we control for a test score such as the SAT, then people from poorer backgrounds are more successful than people from wealthier backgrounds. That’s empirically false. Controlling for test scores does attenuate the correlation between environment and future life outcomes, but the correlation remains positive.
4
So we are left with “more long-run potential” that is apparently never realized. I understand the frustration that Kahlenberg and others feel about that. In their view, privilege carries certain people through all stages of life — helping them with their SAT performance, helping them through college, helping them get a high-paying job, etc. Perhaps the underprivileged deserve special consideration as a form of redistribution.
If advocates of affirmative action in college admissions couched their arguments entirely in that social-justice framework, I would find their position more respectable. But giving preferences to lower-achieving students is in no way compatible with a merit-based system. When college administrators favor lower-scoring applicants, with no evidence that their scores underestimate their future success on campus or in the broader world, they have prioritized redistribution over merit. Why not acknowledge that?

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/sat-test-adversity-score-debate/
Back to top Go down
 

What ‘Everyone Knows’ about the SAT Is Wrong

View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
 :: Anarcho-Capitalist Categorical Imperatives :: AnCaps & Psychology, Edumbcation, Even IndoctriNation-
 :: 

Anarcho-Capitalist Categorical Imperatives

 :: 

AnCaps & Psychology, Edumbcation, Even IndoctriNation
Index, Portal, Induct Yourself Here, Forum Technical Non-Assistance, Philosophy & Religion, Realpolitik Statism & Bureaucracy, Law & Order, Rights Individualism & Lifestyles, Laissez-faire Free Trade Zone, Science Technology & Environment, Psychology Edumbcation & IndoctriNation, Culture & Art, Ancapdemia's Ebony Basement, High Octane One-on-One Debate, Celebrate Evildoers' Inadvertent Contributions to Ancap Values, Idiot of the Week Award Nominees Are, Humor, Freestyle Miscellaneous, Ancaps Emporium, OZschwitz Slave Pen Downunder Boutique, Anarcho-Capitalists,AnCaps Forum,Anti-State,Anti-Statist,Inalienable Rights Defenders,Non-Aggression Principle,Non-Initiation of Force Principle,Rothbardians,Anarchist,Capitalist,objectivism,Ayn Rand,Anarcho-Capitalism,Anarcho-Capitalist,politics,libertarianism,Ancap Forum,Anarchist Forum,Vulgar Libertarians,Hippies of The Right,Forum for Anarcho-Capitalist,Forum for Anarcho-Capitalists,Forum for AnCap,Forum for AnCaps,Libertarian,Anarcho-Objectivist,Freedom, Laissez Faire, Free Trade, Black Market, Randroid, Randroids, Rothbardian, AynArchist,Anarcho-Capitalist Forum, Anarchism, Anarchy, Free Market Anarchism, Free Market Anarchy, Market Anarchy, Market Anarchism, Volunteerism, Libertarian anarchism,
Create a forum on Forumotion | ©phpBB | Free forum support | Report an abuse | Forumotion.com