MyFox
 

Clarity in a world of chaos

by Herschel from You don't know, do you?

Last Post 234 days, 6 hours Ago


In an era of information over load, ACT Prep courses, AP courses, SAT Prep courses, TAKS, No child left behind, etc., the following article really has me puzzled.

 

With ALL of what today's youth has before them to make life easier, and to finish high school having been exposed to information we didn't receive until college- its unbelievable that kids today 17-19, are actually getting dumber.  I know that's poor English, but it conveys the point.)

 

Last year's graduating class (2006) posted the lowest SAT scores in recent history, only to be surpassed by the class of 2007.  How?  Why?  Back when Jesus and I were in High School, we didn't have ACT/SAT Prep courses, no AP courses, no guidance counselors, no internet, and little of what the kids today have. How can kids with access to all of what's available today, be worse off on average (academically) than those who didn't have it? Some will point to the lengthened test, or that more minorities are taking the tests. What many fail to realize is, a longer test actually increases your chance of passing, it doesn't decrease it.

 

Example: On a 20-question test, if you miss five, you will still make a 75.
On a 50-question test, if you miss five- you will earn a 90.

 

Therefore, a longer test is better.

 

Many minorities have access to similar preparatory material. You can buy ACT/SAT Prep software at Wal-Mart. Are we overexposed now, or have the Nintendo, X-Box, Playstation, and MySpace conspired to warp the value system of our kids?

 

What do you think, Dallas? Read on...

 

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070828/ap_on_re_us/sat_
scores

By JUSTIN POPE, AP Education Writer 23 minutes ago

The class of 2007 averaged the lowest math and reading SAT scores since 1999, the College Board reported Tuesday.

Last spring's high school seniors scored on average 502, out of a possible 800 points, on the critical reading section of the country's most popular college entrance exam, down from 503 for the class of 2006. Math scores fell three points from 518 to 515.

The declines follow a seven-point drop last year for the first class to take a lengthened and redesigned SAT, which included higher-level math questions and eliminated analogies. The College Board, which owns the exam, insisted the new exam wasn't harder and attributed last year's drop to fewer students taking it a second time. Students typically fare about 30 points better when they take the exam again.

The College Board's report Tuesday noted that a record number of students — just short of 1.5 million — took the test. The cohort of test-takers also was the most diverse ever, with minority students accounting for 39 percent: There has been a persistent gap between the scores of whites and the two largest U.S. minority groups, Hispanics and blacks.

In New York, 89 percent of students took the exam, up from 88 percent last year. Maine recently became the first state to use the SAT to meet its Grade 11 assessment requirements under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, and 100 percent of students took the exam there, compared to about three-quarters in the class of 2006.

"They have taken a very progressive stand in trying to get more and more students to go to college," College Board President Gaston Caperton said of Maine at a news conference Tuesday morning. "The larger the population you get to take an examination, it obviously knocks down the scores."

The number of black students taking the SAT rose 6 percent, and the number of test-takers calling themselves "Other Hispanic, Latino or Latin American" (a group that does not include Puerto Ricans or Mexican Americans) rose more than 25 percent.

Average scores also slipped from 497 to 494 on the writing portion of the SAT, which debuted with the class of 2006. Many colleges are waiting to see results from the first few years of data on the writing exam before determining how to use it.

Figures released earlier this month on the rival ACT exam showed a slight increase — from 21.1 last year to 21.2, on a scale of 1 to 36 — for the class of 2007.

The SAT has historically been more popular on the East and West coasts, while the ACT has been more popular in the Midwest and inland western states. But more and more students are taking both exams to try to improve their college resumes.

 

 

---------------------------------------------
---
17 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 17
Page 1 of 1
furbie read my blog view my photos
Aug 28, 2007 | 11:40 AM

Putting Linebackers = I can only say :" I hope my next test is a million questions long!"

I'm probably the only person that ever got supended for making zero on my drug test !!!

UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Aug 28, 2007 | 4:59 PM

School has become about anything but the children.

Social promotions, caring about the self-esteem of future criminals is what the schools focus on these days.

The hip -hop artists have to serve as the mom and dad for so many children its horrible

So the public schools keep the charde up that its a money issue the whole while denying students the voucher program.

Not that is a great system either but it goes to the heart of its not what the parents want its what the unions want.

And dont forget the focus placed on sports where many a minority student shines but as we know sports scheduling and academics dont mix well.

So the coach looks like Tom Landry and the once great HS or college star remains uneducated and out on the streets after all the social promotions.

But its NOT the system that is failing us.

Its the lazy uncaring parents who might show up to protest but not be present in the childs life everday!!

TexasGuyDFW read my blog view my photos
Aug 28, 2007 | 8:13 PM

I could not have said it better UCantHandle...

Even though the schools are totally screwed up... it is nobody's fault but the parents for turning over education to educrats, and not staying involved in the process. We have the power to fix it, we just don't have the will.

mckinney_mom_87 read my blog
Aug 29, 2007 | 3:48 AM

i graduated in 2005. and i would have to say that the problem is.... that schools are no longer teaching useful material... we are being "taught to a test" if that makes any sense... instead of being taught material that was taught back in the day, we are only being taught basic concepts, spend one day on a concept, and fly through a text book to make sure we cover everything that would be on the test. this is to ensure we can PASS the test. if we PASS, the school gets MORE MONEY. see the pattern??? its not the SAT that they are trying to get us to pass... its the TAKS. and that is where the problem lies. so when we go to take the SAT, we have no clue. we were only taught to pass the TAKS. we dont know common place knowledge. if it wasnt for me taking the SAT prep class, i probably wouldnt have done as well as i did, in the math area. i am pretty good in the english department. but, that is because i received most of my education in a different state. contrary to the school i went to out here, texas doesnt have a very good school system. the school i went to ran the GPA on a 6.0 scale. which looks good, yes... but i had to take all AP classes to feel anywhere challenged to the extent that i did, taking a regular class back in florida. so the problem is in the standardize testing they make us take all school years. if they spent more time actually teaching, i think there would be more LEARNING taking place, instead of "storing".

TexasGuyDFW read my blog view my photos
Aug 29, 2007 | 6:31 AM

so maybe we should switch from teaching and taking the TAKS to teaching and taking the SAT?

There has to be some standard to teach to, or else all the wacky liberal teacher will be teaching whatever thay want to, like they did "back in the day".

My civics teacher (DISD) put all the jocks, cheerleaders and drill team members in the front of the class, and talked about sports the whole hour. The rest of us could sleep for all he cared. He went to every game, sat on the front row. He is the reason we have TAKS.

UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Aug 29, 2007 | 11:33 AM

because teachers Back in the day had degrees and diplomas.
But then along came affirmative Action and that mindset came social promoting.

Not a matter of what you learned or earned but what would make the politcians happy.
And of course force mo money to come their way to support injustices.

Injustices that money cant fix but that never stopped the greedy hateful politican.

So now the children who really need the help get shoved all over the place and excuses are made, test scores are faked etc just like Affirmative Action which has fooled the average joe into thinking it was about equality.

Nothing could be further from it but that doesnt stop the politican and the guilible public.

KellerKowboy read my blog view my photos
Aug 29, 2007 | 3:11 PM

You're on a roll, UC....

Bottom line, to me: FAR too many poplular (far more popular than an education!)distractions in all phases of everyday life. Many of which have been mentioned above.

Parents/Parent see school as a Day Care for the younguns and "someplace to hang out" for the teens. Extremely small percentage of parents take part in their child's formal education and then blame everything under the Sun....except, of course, themselves. There are absolutely NO obligations imposed and everything is given to these kids upon request.

Our schools offer an excellent education. Our kids don't take it. "And You Can't Make Me!!"

leegrimsley read my blog view my photos
Aug 29, 2007 | 10:43 PM

McMkinney Mon - Are you a prophet?

we are being "taught to a test" if that makes any sense.

It makes sense in that I understand what you are saying

But it does not make sense in that it is actually being done

That is all you hear these days -- kids are being readied to take the SAT or TAKS or whatever kind of test is popular today.

When I was in school the only standardized test we had was the IQ test which was administered each year. All it was was a measuring stick for students IQ.

We had six weeks tests, final exams each semester and pop quizzes which could rear their evil little heads in any class at any time

One time in trigonometry class the teacher gave us a pop quiz of one question

How long is a piece of string?

You made 100 or zero

I thought for about five minutes, wrote down my answer and turned it in.

The teacher smiled and wrote a big red 100 across the top of my paper

My answer -- twice the distance from the center to either end

UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Aug 30, 2007 | 9:32 AM

mckinney mom,

one of my friends say that in (some?)of the schools they have a "ZAP" Aeros are not permitted where any grade that goes below 70, the student is allowed to keep taking the test until it goes above 70.
thereby insuring the (corrupt) school and the system a false report.

Not to mention the child being shown how to cheat in life.

Know anything about this??

Herschel read my blog
Aug 31, 2007 | 9:26 AM

Dang UC, I see you haven't changed a bit... LOL

I bet if lightning struck your house, you'd find some kind of way to tie that to Affirmative Action... LOL, you're nothing, if not consistent...

I hear this a lot, "They're only teaching us to pass TAKS and save their jobs". Maybe this is true. Maybe some of it is on the kids too. I know I had to keep my foot in our teens butt, to keep him studying. Smart as a whip, but LAZY.

All many kids care about today is X-Box, Playstation, MySpace, and for the ones really lost- drugs, alcohol and sex. You can reach some kids, some kids really care, and others could care less.

Our teachers taught, period. There was no need for ACT Prep, and all of that. I scored 20 on mine, walking in the door cold-turkey, with no "preparation" aside from what I'd learned from 9th - 12th grade. Imagine if I'd been somewhere with prep courses, study guides, etc..

But, back to wht I know about teens. It got to the point that I had to take away the Playstation, and unplug the PC to make sure he studied. This isn't my son, but I helped raise him.

I slacked off as a kid too, and he reminded me a lot of me when I was a child. But, the difference betwen him and me was, I could buckle down and finish strong (ahead of everyone)- because I cared about my grades. He's jut as smart, but lazy as heck.

He's happy with a 70... Brags about it.

I'm like, dude- if you went to school with me, that "C" you're sporting here with a 70, woudl be an "F" at my high school. Our scale was tough, so- to be a 4.0 student, you had to go for it. When

Herschel read my blog
Aug 31, 2007 | 9:26 AM

Our scale was tough, so- to be a 4.0 student, you had to go for it. When I got to college and saw all I needed was a 90 to get an "A", I got happy.

My school:

96 - 100 A
95 - 89 B
88 - 80 C
79 - 74 D

74 & below (F)

Hard to believe that 20 years ago, the bar was higher. Oh, and teachers woudl not only write all over your paper in red. They called out scores. SO, you, and EVERYBODY knew when you flunked.

Low self-esteem? No, if you really have self esteem- you'd work hard to make sure the teacher didn't announce your F to the world.

UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Aug 31, 2007 | 10:17 AM

Herschel,

Just for a second give that premise of mine a chance.

Can you not see that it is a mindset, a trick, that actually causes more disrespect than respect.

Any person who works wants respect, especially for their work.

So while some might say, I dont care if you respect me or not, just give me that job, that person would be disengenious AT BEST.

Respect is earned. As I would think we could agree on.

How can it be earned if the bankers son is given "The job" just because he is the bankers son.

Same thing applies to one who is given those exxtra points or that job because of any reason other than having done the work to get it.

Back when I hired people I can assure you I hired people to do a job.

Even if others didnt, thats life.
They are ignorant and that ignorance comes back to get them.

Do you not agree because you see yourself in that situation?
Or if you agree that somehow makes you a "traitor?"

If intelligent people who happen to be black wont make the break from the "trickery" what chance is there for others!!!

Herschel read my blog
Aug 31, 2007 | 1:48 PM

No, I don't see myself in that situation at all. But, I can't help how others "see" me. They have to deal with that, not me.

But, I'd line my resume and credentials up against anyone at my job, and I'm sure I meet or exceed them in every measureable area. So, on a personal level- no, I don't feel threatened, or that I've slid in because of Affirmative Action. I feel I've earned everything I have.

All Affirmative Action did, as far as I'm concerned, was give me the opportunity to compete. I still had to interview, I still had to sell myself, and once I got the job- I still had to perform- otherwise- I'd be looking for a job.

AA is not a back door, it's a brick in the front door, that makes sure minorities are at the very least considered for the job, promotion, acceptance to the university, etc..

Is it a perfect solution? No. But, I'd be willing to bet that if AA didn't exist, there'd be no EO, there'd be no diversity, all the black, latino, and asian non-athletic students would be packed into Historically black colleges and Universities- because the major universities, and good paying jobs would be a members only society... I don't believes that provides any assurance of getting the best and the brightest- only the whitest. And, that's not fair either.

So, no I don't think I've been given anything by AA, aside from the guarantee of a "chance" to showcase my talent. After that, it was up to the employer to hire me, and up to me to perform at the level expected to be retained.

UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Sep 2, 2007 | 1:28 PM

So then in your book whites would only hire whites.

So to be consistent then blacks would only hire blacks, not based on what whites do but because that is, according to you , just the way it is.

So if thats true then whats the problem?
If all groups only hire their own, and we know it, then why fight it.
Why not start your own business, and forget about Affirmative Action.

"White law" doesnt state you or me cant start are own business.

And you would lose that bet as history has already proved.
Before AA many business had mixed races working for them.

Affirmative Action acutally sets a limit, a ceiling.
It makes employers upset that they are told what to do so many will only hire the "alloted amount" hence the quota system.

Herschel read my blog
Sep 4, 2007 | 9:22 AM

I shouldn't have let a discussion on education get spun into another debate on Afirmative Action- but, one last time.

Prior to AA, yes- blacks had jobs with white employers, but they weren't good jobs. They were janitors, laborers, the college educated ones best hope was to become teachers, and for the truly fortunate, jobs like being a doctor or dentist awaited. But for most, they were clustered where the rubber meets the road. Yes, there were whites there too, but- the point was- there were no black executives, and unless they started their own business, or inherited one- there were no women executives either.

Programs like Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action poked holes and in some cases smashed the glass ceiling to let those who have the talent to rise to the top, rise to the top. Good people who otherwise wouldn't make it, due to the "good ol' boy" network holding them back, can still make it.

Blacks hiring blacks wouldn't help matters, because there is very litle wealth in the black community. The top 5% of America, holds 95% of America's wealth. The rest of the 95% of us peons, are struggling for a slice of the remaining 5%.

This is true for Asians, Hispanics, etc... Most of the Fortune 500 companies, if not all, were founded or are now lead by white males. That is because that is where the majority of the wealth has always been in America... With the real Republicans. Not down in the weeds, with the wannabes- who feel they have something in common with the true elite, in American society. The similarity is only skin deep.

You don't have to

UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Sep 4, 2007 | 5:24 PM

ok fine
But even very little wealth opens the door

stinkey read my blog
Feb 1, 2008 | 6:30 AM

Take the gov. out of ed. and turn it over to the states and you will see a big increase in the ed. level. Do away with the dept. of ed. in wash.and put disp. back in the schools.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




Herschel

Dallas, (75287) by way of Waterproof, LA (71375). 10-year Army vet. 10 years in corporate America. Husband, Father, Son, Christian, Part-Time Comedian.

Member Since: 10/9/2006