5 ms·

To say nothing of the logical contortions required to argue that modern standardized tests discriminates based on ancestry or skin color.

learc83 8y ago
They clearly do. The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in.
- fiblye 8y ago
  >The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in. What kind of absurd "argument" is this? If you're testing for a university in America, the expectation is that not only will the test be in English, but the vast bulk of your university courses. And Asian Americans, despite a large number coming from families of non-English speakers, still do disproportionately well. But if the local language is something you struggle with, that local university isn't for you, unless we're also going to argue that degree awarding requires lower standards. In which case, just throw university in the dump because it's worthless. If we're at a point where having a majority language and doing important business in that language is bordering on discrimination, this society is lost.
  - learc83 8y ago
    So you disagree with the assertion that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher than non-native speakers of that dialect--all else being equal? Or did you just decide you'd rather argue with something I didn't write?
    - bbddg 8y ago
      Ignore this person. They're clearly of the mind that diversity is the number one threat to the civilized world, never mind what reality is.
    - colordrops 8y ago
      Even if it is case that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher, it's not clear that the result is due to language barriers, and could be a correlation with socio-economic groups. That is the point of bringing up non-native speakers doing well, as the test is not even their native language, which is certainly a greater disadvantage than a different dialect.
      - learc83 8y ago
        So you don't think that there is an advantage gained by being a native speaker of a dialect a test is written in? The academic consensus is that there is. The clearest example is that vocabulary is a large part of most standardized tests and native speakers have larger vocabularies than proficient L2 speakers.
        skookumchuck 8y ago
        How about the math part? Besides, if I was on a college admissions board, I'd give consideration to an L2 speaker if his verbal scores were unusually below his math scores.
        learc83 8y ago
        I'm less familiar with math testing in general, but as far as direct effects go (not something caused by language of instruction) my guess is that it would be limited to instructions and word problems.
        jiminy_john 8y ago
        So you want to not test people in English but in some vague universal language?! What would that be: "equality of outcome"? Propaganda?!
        learc83 8y ago
        Yes. You've correctly read between the lines to discover my hidden, unwritten argument. All standardized testing should be conducted in the universal language of interpretive dance.
    - fiblye 8y ago
      All languages are going to have dialects. Trying to eliminate that "bias" is going to just result in removing language entirely from exams, unless we decide to make tests for every single test taker. But the point of standardization is to have a solid, uniform goal for all to work towards. And if you're applying to an American university and you have difficulty with what's considered standard American English, you will have far worse troubles in university. And again, people from families of non-native speakers do well. Generally better than people who only have family who speak the native language and dialect. That people think it's discrimination is quite clearly silly. :)
      - learc83 8y ago
        It sounds like you really want to be arguing with something other than what I'm writing, so you've just decided to make that happen.
    - megaman22 8y ago
      There is in all cultures a language of educated discourse. To take an extreme example, nobody ever natively spoke scholarly Mandarin and wrote eight-legged essays for fun. The SAT is less severe, but, yeah, it requires some effort and practice to be familiar with the language and the essay format. Not being able or willing to put in the effort to learn this very accessible information is not a good sign for being able to survive equally or moreso arbitrary environments in university.
      - learc83 8y ago
        What is it with this topic causing people to argue with straw men? >Not being able or willing to put in the effort to learn This has nothing to do with putting in effort. Across a population, people who grew up speaking a dialect will perform better on a test than people who learned to speak that dialect later. This isn't a controversial statement. If your goal is to ensure that speakers of other dialects have equal access to top tier higher education, you will need to account for that somehow. If you dont care about equal access to speakers of other dialects, then you don't have to do anything.
- Teeer 8y ago
  But yet Asians perform the best on standardized tests, not whites who comes from England?
  - learc83 8y ago
    Do you have any data on white English immigrants who take the SAT? I sure don't.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      The children of East Asian immigrants perform better than the children of white Americans. How does the language hypothesis you put forth account for that?
      - learc83 8y ago
        1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. 4. Language differences are a factor in performance but obviously not the only factor or the largest factor.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        > 1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. A quick glance at the first graph on this page will tell you that almost all Asian Americans are either first or second generation: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-ab... Key stats: Asian American population in 2015 is slightly more than 20 million. In 1960 it is about 1 million and only about 2.5 million in 1980. > 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. Is it somehow easier for Asian immigrants to learn the prestige dialect than Hispanic immigrants?
tomdell 8y ago
That is not the argument. Tests are written by people who talk a certain way, in a way that is easier to process for people who talk the same way. Different communities use different language, and this is reflected in how quickly different students process the problems on standardized tests. There's also the issue that standardized test scores are higher for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them - things which are scarce in poorer families where the student might have to work or help take care of younger siblings. Years of institutionalized racism (loans not given, redlining, denial of employment opportunities) have economically crippled some ethnic communities.
- throwawayjava 8y ago
  The diversity thing is mostly a red-herring. Admissions offers are abandoning standardized tests because of Goodhart's Law. > for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them It's not just time and encouragement. SAT/ACT prep is serious industry. $100+/hr tutoring sessions. Owners of good SAT prep businesses can make six or seven figures in a few months. And good prep courses really do work. Tests, like coding interviews, are a game you can hack with enough time and effort. The signal is totally washed out; with enough money, you can learn how to take the test well enough.
  - SatvikBeri 8y ago
    The research suggests SAT test prep has an effect of about one seventh of a standard deviation – about 50 points out of 2400[1]. That's significant but not huge. Most of the perception of large gains comes from the fact that people do better as they get older with or without coaching. (None of the research is great, but better than nothing.) [1]: https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size
    - learc83 8y ago
      The College Board released new results in 2017 showing a more than 50 point increase out of 1600 versus students who didn't practice. This was with just 20 hours of practice. Many high achieving students practice for 5+ hours per week. South Korean cram school style 2-3 hours per day is in a completely different league than a standard SAT prep course, but much of the research that shows no result counts them the same.

learc83 8y ago

They clearly do. The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in.

fiblye 8y ago
>The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in. What kind of absurd "argument" is this? If you're testing for a university in America, the expectation is that not only will the test be in English, but the vast bulk of your university courses. And Asian Americans, despite a large number coming from families of non-English speakers, still do disproportionately well. But if the local language is something you struggle with, that local university isn't for you, unless we're also going to argue that degree awarding requires lower standards. In which case, just throw university in the dump because it's worthless. If we're at a point where having a majority language and doing important business in that language is bordering on discrimination, this society is lost.
- learc83 8y ago
  So you disagree with the assertion that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher than non-native speakers of that dialect--all else being equal? Or did you just decide you'd rather argue with something I didn't write?
  - bbddg 8y ago
    Ignore this person. They're clearly of the mind that diversity is the number one threat to the civilized world, never mind what reality is.
  - colordrops 8y ago
    Even if it is case that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher, it's not clear that the result is due to language barriers, and could be a correlation with socio-economic groups. That is the point of bringing up non-native speakers doing well, as the test is not even their native language, which is certainly a greater disadvantage than a different dialect.
    - learc83 8y ago
      So you don't think that there is an advantage gained by being a native speaker of a dialect a test is written in? The academic consensus is that there is. The clearest example is that vocabulary is a large part of most standardized tests and native speakers have larger vocabularies than proficient L2 speakers.
      - skookumchuck 8y ago
        How about the math part? Besides, if I was on a college admissions board, I'd give consideration to an L2 speaker if his verbal scores were unusually below his math scores.
        learc83 8y ago
        I'm less familiar with math testing in general, but as far as direct effects go (not something caused by language of instruction) my guess is that it would be limited to instructions and word problems.
      - jiminy_john 8y ago
        So you want to not test people in English but in some vague universal language?! What would that be: "equality of outcome"? Propaganda?!
        learc83 8y ago
        Yes. You've correctly read between the lines to discover my hidden, unwritten argument. All standardized testing should be conducted in the universal language of interpretive dance.
  - fiblye 8y ago
    All languages are going to have dialects. Trying to eliminate that "bias" is going to just result in removing language entirely from exams, unless we decide to make tests for every single test taker. But the point of standardization is to have a solid, uniform goal for all to work towards. And if you're applying to an American university and you have difficulty with what's considered standard American English, you will have far worse troubles in university. And again, people from families of non-native speakers do well. Generally better than people who only have family who speak the native language and dialect. That people think it's discrimination is quite clearly silly. :)
    - learc83 8y ago
      It sounds like you really want to be arguing with something other than what I'm writing, so you've just decided to make that happen.
  - megaman22 8y ago
    There is in all cultures a language of educated discourse. To take an extreme example, nobody ever natively spoke scholarly Mandarin and wrote eight-legged essays for fun. The SAT is less severe, but, yeah, it requires some effort and practice to be familiar with the language and the essay format. Not being able or willing to put in the effort to learn this very accessible information is not a good sign for being able to survive equally or moreso arbitrary environments in university.
    - learc83 8y ago
      What is it with this topic causing people to argue with straw men? >Not being able or willing to put in the effort to learn This has nothing to do with putting in effort. Across a population, people who grew up speaking a dialect will perform better on a test than people who learned to speak that dialect later. This isn't a controversial statement. If your goal is to ensure that speakers of other dialects have equal access to top tier higher education, you will need to account for that somehow. If you dont care about equal access to speakers of other dialects, then you don't have to do anything.
Teeer 8y ago
But yet Asians perform the best on standardized tests, not whites who comes from England?
- learc83 8y ago
  Do you have any data on white English immigrants who take the SAT? I sure don't.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    The children of East Asian immigrants perform better than the children of white Americans. How does the language hypothesis you put forth account for that?
    - learc83 8y ago
      1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. 4. Language differences are a factor in performance but obviously not the only factor or the largest factor.
      - toasterlovin 8y ago
        > 1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. A quick glance at the first graph on this page will tell you that almost all Asian Americans are either first or second generation: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-ab... Key stats: Asian American population in 2015 is slightly more than 20 million. In 1960 it is about 1 million and only about 2.5 million in 1980. > 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. Is it somehow easier for Asian immigrants to learn the prestige dialect than Hispanic immigrants?

tomdell 8y ago

That is not the argument. Tests are written by people who talk a certain way, in a way that is easier to process for people who talk the same way. Different communities use different language, and this is reflected in how quickly different students process the problems on standardized tests. There's also the issue that standardized test scores are higher for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them - things which are scarce in poorer families where the student might have to work or help take care of younger siblings. Years of institutionalized racism (loans not given, redlining, denial of employment opportunities) have economically crippled some ethnic communities.

throwawayjava 8y ago
The diversity thing is mostly a red-herring. Admissions offers are abandoning standardized tests because of Goodhart's Law. > for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them It's not just time and encouragement. SAT/ACT prep is serious industry. $100+/hr tutoring sessions. Owners of good SAT prep businesses can make six or seven figures in a few months. And good prep courses really do work. Tests, like coding interviews, are a game you can hack with enough time and effort. The signal is totally washed out; with enough money, you can learn how to take the test well enough.
- SatvikBeri 8y ago
  The research suggests SAT test prep has an effect of about one seventh of a standard deviation – about 50 points out of 2400[1]. That's significant but not huge. Most of the perception of large gains comes from the fact that people do better as they get older with or without coaching. (None of the research is great, but better than nothing.) [1]: https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size
  - learc83 8y ago
    The College Board released new results in 2017 showing a more than 50 point increase out of 1600 versus students who didn't practice. This was with just 20 hours of practice. Many high achieving students practice for 5+ hours per week. South Korean cram school style 2-3 hours per day is in a completely different league than a standard SAT prep course, but much of the research that shows no result counts them the same.