22 Apr
2002
22 Apr
'02
1:37 p.m.
The SAT, at least, has been rescaled, resulting in older scores being
equivalent to newer scores about 100 points greater.
Even without an explicit rescaling, standards could have been lowered by
virtue of the questions themselves having become less challenging.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Underwood [mailto:nemesis-lists@icequake.net]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 5:06 PM
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)
Dick,
I wouldn't either. I'm not sure that you can
go and get an education
anymore. ... Back when I was in high school, a score of 800 on one or
the other of the SAT's was a rare event that didn't occur every year
in a school system in a city of half-a-million or so. Nowadays, with
the obviously much-lowered standards, it happens all the time.
I really don't see how this follows. Students are scoring higher on
standardized exams, thus the standards must "obviously" be much-lowered.
Without having proof to the contrary, Occam's Razor would suggest that
the explanation to higher overall scores on standardized tests would
simply be "a better overall quality of education today". After all, if
students are learning more and thus scoring higher on standardized
tests, well, what more does that mean than that the standardized tests
are doing what they are designed for (as demographic tools) and are
representative of the increase in students' learning?
Without proof, we cannot assume either way. So if you would like to
make an argument about education quality in the US today, back it up
with facts, otherwise it just sounds like "In my day" geezer-ranting.
--
Ryan Underwood, <nemesis at icequake.net>, icq=10317253