Are the SATs Biased Against Blacks?

[blastoff]

Perhaps it is biased in favor of those who have had the value of a good education instilled in them and have worked hard to accomplish it, regardless of what race they might be.

 

[ConHog]

Exactly. The SATs are biased against stupid.

 

[IanC]

Maybe the SAT is biased against those who attended horrible schools?

Perhaps if we stopped asking racist questions, we would stop being a racist society?

Would you be happy if there was no racial bean counting? Would blacks be OK with that? No more hectoring of whites because of racial disparities? Live and let live? No, I think that blacks want to be able to point to disparities and claim that white racism is the cause while simultaneously deny the racial differences that cause the disparities.

Ravi seems to doubt that only 2 SAT questions showed a racial difference on the tests studied (and even then only sometimes) while ignoring the massive evidence that the test questions do not show a racial bias. Actually the SATs slightly overpredict NAM scores which is totally in line with the finding that black do slightly better on questions that are likely to be guessed on.

 

[IanC]

Perhaps it is biased in favor of those who have had the value of a good education instilled in them and have worked hard to accomplish it, regardless of what race they might be.

The SATs are designed to detect intelligence and prior learning, and they do that successfully.

Blacks, on average, score lower no matter how you break down the scores. Blacks from affluent homes do worse than whites living in poverty. Blacks from homes witheducational degrees score lower than whites from high school dropouts. Average racial IQs and regression to the mean are powerful social forces.

 

[Ravi]

Good job spreading disinformation, asshole.

 

[IanC]

Good job spreading disinformation, asshole.

really? what part of what I said was 'disinformation'? is disinformation information that you wish was hidden? perhaps you should call it dysinformation because it is information that makes you feel bad.

please feel free to point out any information you don't agree with. perhaps we can investigate and find out who is closer to the truth.

 

[IanC]

Still no comment on what the 'disinformation' is, Ravi?

Perhaps you think the tests are racially biased despite the massive efforts to get rid of any question that might show bias other than against stupidity and being unprepared?

Perhaps you think the schools that average blacks go to are not as effective as the average white goes to? Does the racial gap disappear in bad schools or do whites and asians still perform at a higher level? How 'bout at good schools?

Whites are richer and send their kids to SAT tutoring? Yes but same practise affect can be had by taking a SAT prep book out of the library. I would be interested in just how many kids take those courses and how big the increase is.

Black culture, stereotype threat, acting white, etc, etc,. Who is responsible and what should be done?

 

[IanC]

Did any of you read Ogbu's book on Shaker Heights? Well off, professional blacks moved to an upscale neighbourhood with great schools but were concerned when their children still performed poorly so they asked a famous professor to come and find out why. When he told them the reasons he discovered, the parents were just as pissed off as if he had told them that their children were not as intellectually talented as the white students (as was surely part of the problem). Blacks only want excuses, especially if it can be blamed on white racism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Perhaps it is biased in favor of those who have had the value of a good education instilled in them and have worked hard to accomplish it, regardless of what race they might be.

Nicely put.

Some time ago I read "Jewish Mystique" by Ernest Van Den Haag, a professor at NYU. He had a theory that laid out an interesting scenario:

1. A Jew who was very smart married the towns richest man's daughter, and was basically supported to study his whole life, and had many children who carried his genes into the population of Jews...

2. A Christian who was very smart would become a member of the clergy, and, due to celibacy, removed his genes from the Christian gene pool.

Therefore...well, you get the idea.

I wonder if one can come up with scenarios that result in a racial segment of the population has the SAT problem under discussion.
I can think of several.

 

[Yukon.]

The Negro people can't pass the SAT's so of course the SAT's are biased against them. If the average Negro can't measure up to the same standards as the average white person then the method used to measure that standard must be biased against the Negro. This is the trusim of the USA.

 

[syrenn]

And here I though they had evened it all out and were going to give the test in ebonics.

 

[IanC]

Perhaps it is biased in favor of those who have had the value of a good education instilled in them and have worked hard to accomplish it, regardless of what race they might be.

Nicely put.

Some time ago I read "Jewish Mystique" by Ernest Van Den Haag, a professor at NYU. He had a theory that laid out an interesting scenario:

1. A Jew who was very smart married the towns richest man's daughter, and was basically supported to study his whole life, and had many children who carried his genes into the population of Jews...

2. A Christian who was very smart would become a member of the clergy, and, due to celibacy, removed his genes from the Christian gene pool.

Therefore...well, you get the idea.

I wonder if one can come up with scenarios that result in a racial segment of the population has the SAT problem under discussion.
I can think of several.

Your point should have actually stated that Rabbis were chosen from the smartest ranks of the jews, supported by their community and ecouraged to have many children. This was a very eugenic process and is very likely to have influenced the demonstrated intellectual strength of jews.

 

[IanC]

And here I though they had evened it all out and were going to give the test in ebonics.

I realize your comment is just a joke but after a few quick practise exams the whites would still out perfom the blacks and the math portion would be unchanged.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Perhaps it is biased in favor of those who have had the value of a good education instilled in them and have worked hard to accomplish it, regardless of what race they might be.

Nicely put.

Some time ago I read "Jewish Mystique" by Ernest Van Den Haag, a professor at NYU. He had a theory that laid out an interesting scenario:

1. A Jew who was very smart married the towns richest man's daughter, and was basically supported to study his whole life, and had many children who carried his genes into the population of Jews...

2. A Christian who was very smart would become a member of the clergy, and, due to celibacy, removed his genes from the Christian gene pool.

Therefore...well, you get the idea.

I wonder if one can come up with scenarios that result in a racial segment of the population has the SAT problem under discussion.
I can think of several.

Your point should have actually stated that Rabbis were chosen from the smartest ranks of the jews, supported by their community and ecouraged to have many children. This was a very eugenic process and is very likely to have influenced the demonstrated intellectual strength of jews.

While I try to avoid using the term 'eugenics' in a positive sense, it is accurate in this connection.

My point is that nurture, not nature is what determines success.

While I am not denying any of the negative stats in this thread, I tried to open the door to the 'Acting White' depressor, and the acceptance of social pressures.

 

[IanC]

Nicely put.

Some time ago I read "Jewish Mystique" by Ernest Van Den Haag, a professor at NYU. He had a theory that laid out an interesting scenario:

1. A Jew who was very smart married the towns richest man's daughter, and was basically supported to study his whole life, and had many children who carried his genes into the population of Jews...

2. A Christian who was very smart would become a member of the clergy, and, due to celibacy, removed his genes from the Christian gene pool.

Therefore...well, you get the idea.

I wonder if one can come up with scenarios that result in a racial segment of the population has the SAT problem under discussion.
I can think of several.

Your point should have actually stated that Rabbis were chosen from the smartest ranks of the jews, supported by their community and ecouraged to have many children. This was a very eugenic process and is very likely to have influenced the demonstrated intellectual strength of jews.

While I try to avoid using the term 'eugenics' in a positive sense, it is accurate in this connection.

My point is that nurture, not nature is what determines success.

While I am not denying any of the negative stats in this thread, I tried to open the door to the 'Acting White' depressor, and the acceptance of social pressures.

Ahhh...gotcha

Another post talks about a charter school that offers longer hours, mentoring etc, while demanding a dress and behaviour code. One of the first comments complained that the school was brainwashing the students. How telling is that?

 

[Tank]

My point is that nurture, not nature is what determines success.

Would not the intelligence of a person effect a persons ability to nurture?

 

[Douger]

Two questions ?#1
Hoo B Matin Loofa Kinn ?
#2
Ha menny dem white prezdens was afow Abaha Linkin ?


%50. You B failinNshit. Werd up ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

My point is that nurture, not nature is what determines success.

Would not the intelligence of a person effect a persons ability to nurture?

Sure, but I'm not writing about an individual...rather, the group and how it should compared to every other group.

Without any real evidence, except that most of us have known blacks with ability, anecdotal, I suspect that if the same kind of pressure and expectation is put on individuals of the group in question, the results would be...comparable.

 

[IanC]

My point is that nurture, not nature is what determines success.

Would not the intelligence of a person effect a persons ability to nurture?

Exactly. Not only that but a person's nature determines a lot of what they get out of nurturing. Twin studies have shown that personality and character traits are mostly heritible and fixed. A kid who likes to read will read anything available, to a kid that likes sports even a crumpled piece of paper is a ball. Any parent with more than one child knows that you can influence children but you can't steer them in directions they don't want to go in.

 

[Tank]

Would not the intelligence of a group effect a groups ability to nurture?