Subject:
|
Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Feb 2000 15:58:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
679 times
|
| |
|
|
Chris,
Christopher Weeks wrote:
>
> "Scott E. Sanburn" wrote:
> Why is that? Should the tests be designed to determine who has a good
> chance of succeeding at college? I think so. What if research
> indicates that testing 'white' people with the ACT is valid and testing
> 'black' people with a teamwork LEGO-based spatial test is valid? What
> if?
Because it sets up different standards, which segregate black and
whites, and other groups. There is something about not discriminating
because of race, sex, etc. Isn't there? Or should we? If we want a fair
society, race and sex and everything else should NOT be a factor. Just
because someone is black, we should not say, oh, since the rest of your
race doesn't do well, we will give you the LEGO portion instead of the
ACT, etc. That just blows my mind. If people can't qualify, too bad.
> My M.Ed. is in education - primarily testing.
That's great.
> What if I told you that
> the best correlation of success in college is different for males and
> females. It is! With the data that I had to analyze, the ACT (not the
> SAT) was best for the ~10000 men that I looked at and high school GPA
> was best for the ~10000 women. So, now that we know that one assessment
> is more valid for men and another is more valid for women, is it _fair_
> or _right_ to force the same test on both groups?
This is just more dividing and segregating, and should be struck down,
if it ever makes it to the court.
> As others (Jeremy and/or Frank?) have mentioned, the point is to get the
> right people into college. A college is much better off admitting
> someone who's going to stay for four (or better yet, six) years. All
> that should matter is that people who can make use of a college
> education are getting the chance to do so. As long as that is being
> done in a supportable and valid way, I don't care what the uneducated
> masses think of the 'fairness' of it.
> Affirmative action is a poor model for increasing minority education.
> This may not be. Frankly, it is in all of our best interest for the
> level of education between cultural and SES groups to normalize. We
> don't want unbreakable chains of poverty and ignorance. At least I
> don't. Maybe since you seem to believe that they don't exist, you can't
> get to the point where you don't want them to continue.
I want to keep people i poverty and ignorance, huh? Where did you get
that from?
> > Most colleges *don't* prepare most people for the real world. I have
> > seen this many times, my classes with professors that have never had a
> > real job in the profession they are teaching, etc. The closest I came to
> > the real world was the technical courses I took. All the other classes
> > were not.
>
> It is unclear whether you are saying that this is a good or bad thing.
> Maybe you're just saying that since you got screwed out of adequate
> preparation, everyone else should be too. I'm really not sure.
Chris, since you seem to be taking this totally on a tangent, I think I
am through trying to discuss this. I hope your test for every minority
and sex and orientation and class status do really well, or have society
collapse on itself.
Scott S.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net
Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> http://www.aeieng.com
LEGO Page -> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/3372/legoindex.html
Home Page -> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/3372/index.html
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| (...) In that case, I think we should test ALL students at all levels on their assembler coding skills. Hey, you think using different tests for different people is not fair. Of course I'll start picking doctors who went to school in some other (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| "Scott E. Sanburn" wrote: > Why is that? Should the tests be designed to determine who has a good (...) Making it so they all go to college together segregates them? (...) Should not? What do you mean should? What if it does? Does matter, whether or (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| (...) Why is that? Should the tests be designed to determine who has a good chance of succeeding at college? I think so. What if research indicates that testing 'white' people with the ACT is valid and testing 'black' people with a teamwork (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
89 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
