51–59 of 59 posts
For one thing, it completely puts down science and math courses. In a multivariable calc class, we didn't have reading or writing (though I did have more than 40 pages of homework!)
Second, it's a bit arbitrary.
I actually took part in this study. A few notes: 1. The exam was supposed to be administered 3 times, Freshman, Sophomore, and Senior years. I took it my Freshman and Senior years. 2. The exam was not a normal exam. I won't say it was pointless, it definitely measured something, but it's hard to say exactly what. Imagine you have to make an exam to measure "learning" and this thing was about as close as you could com…
I'm not saying I don't agree that the test may not have measured anything useful, or that there wasn't some sampling bias, but there's nothing inherently wrong with 3 data points per person over four years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that there is a huge responsibility placed on the shoulders of students, as there should be, but there is a deeper problem here. Colleges should motivate students to inquire, to learn, and to challenge themselves. While this motivation could definitely be indirect, it should still be one of the primary goals of educational institutions (not only universities, but schools of all shapes and sizes). One of the b…
You went to a technical school and got a technical degree. That's very different from going to university and studying the liberal arts. I have no idea why we consider them the same in America, but in most places, even though UIUC is a fantastic technical school, a degree in something called "Enterprise Systems Engineering" should not be considered a university degree. You simply didn't have that experience. And, yes…
Arts and Sciences => Academic
Engineering, Medicine, Law, Pharmacy, Business, and everything else => Vocational
I think we need to recognize that there are two classes of people who go to college:
Academic: those who wish to learn
Vocational: those who wish to qualify for jobs
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why isn't it legal, out of curiosity? I get to see quite a few CVs that include the rank the applicant got in the IIT-JEE exam (for most purposes, I find that to be a rather useless metric.)
Griggs vs. Duke Power Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.#Judgme... Since the SAT[1] is a glorified IQ test[2] the rankings from high to low by population group go Ashkenazi Jews >> East Asians >> Caucasian >> Blacks. The Disparate Impact legal doctrine[3] means that unless you can show business necessity any test that reliably discriminates between protected classes[4] is automatically ille…
The SAT is a wonderful test for memorization. Also how much time you spent studying, almost as if its a... scholastic test.
It it's relationship to IQ is extremely vague.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Griggs vs. Duke Power Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.#Judgme... Since the SAT[1] is a glorified IQ test[2] the rankings from high to low by population group go Ashkenazi Jews >> East Asians >> Caucasian >> Blacks. The Disparate Impact legal doctrine[3] means that unless you can show business necessity any test that reliably discriminates between protected classes[4] is automatically ille…
Since the SAT[1] is a glorified IQ test[2] The SAT is a wonderful test for memorization. Also how much time you spent studying, almost as if its a... scholastic test. It it's relationship to IQ is extremely vague.
This research established the relationship between SAT and g, as well as the appropriateness of the SAT as a measure of g, and examined the SAT as a premorbid measure of intelligence.
In Study 1, we used the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Measures of g were extracted from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and correlated with SAT scores of 917 participants. The resulting correlation was .82 (.86 corrected for nonlinearity).
Study 2 investigated the correlation between revised and recentered SAT scores and scores on the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices among 104 undergraduates. The resulting correlation was .483 (.72 corrected for restricted range). These studies indicate that the SAT is mainly a test of g.
We provide equations for converting SAT scores to estimated IQs; such conversion could be useful for estimating premorbid IQ or conducting individual difference research with college students.
I find that, as people in technical majors progress through the years, they take less and less humanities and more and more major specific classes.
It might be worrying if math majors didn't take a class that requires problem sets in the last semester. Or english majors didn't take classes that required writing. But to suggest that students aren't learning because they aren't taking courses relevant to their major is a biased assertion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since the SAT[1] is a glorified IQ test[2] The SAT is a wonderful test for memorization. Also how much time you spent studying, almost as if its a... scholastic test. It it's relationship to IQ is extremely vague.
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/15/6/373.abstract This research established the relationship between SAT and g, as well as the appropriateness of the SAT as a measure of g, and examined the SAT as a premorbid measure of intelligence. In Study 1, we used the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Measures of g were extracted from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and correlated with SAT scores of 917…
The test just happened to test on material none of had ever studied, for example how to clean offal. This was a real test which people with the correct experience had scored highly on. Us college students on the other hand, were deemed barely functional by the same test.
The IQ test is not contrived but it does rely on learned knowledge to be able to test. So the IQ test itself is not a very good test of intelligence, especially in the case where the tool (lets say language) it's using to test IQ is lacking in say non-native speakers.
But to get back to the SAT test, my East Asian immigrant high-school friends with decent English - bad SAT scores. Two years later with greatly improved English, same people - great SAT scores. And I am talking about all of the SAT, including the math part.
College isn't about learning, it's about developing intellectually.
I challenge you to develop that statement, so that I know what you meant to say rather than imputing it. An uncharitable interpretation would be that college could be taught with no resources beyond those available at secondary school, since in a number of fields it would be quite possible to use the secondary school intellectual tools to construct your own knowledge, e.g. 30 motivated Math students might be able to…
I don't know which philosopher is to blame for the idea that a brain is some kind of black box and school is there to put knowledge in it, but I'd send him back to college.
I actually took part in this study. A few notes: 1. The exam was supposed to be administered 3 times, Freshman, Sophomore, and Senior years. I took it my Freshman and Senior years. 2. The exam was not a normal exam. I won't say it was pointless, it definitely measured something, but it's hard to say exactly what. Imagine you have to make an exam to measure "learning" and this thing was about as close as you could com…
Could you elaborate on what the exam was like?
One bit was five documents relating to an environmental issue in a small town. The exam asked the student to analyze the documents, looking for biases the sources may have and flaws in their reasoning.
It did a good job of measuring ability to synthesize and analyze sources, but it definitely would be harder to recognize more focused improvements in reasoning ability.