4 ms·
>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 "argum
by 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 agoSo 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 agoIgnore 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 agoEven 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 agoSo 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 agoHow 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 agoI'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 agoSo you want to not test people in English but in some vague universal language?! What would that be: "equality of outcome"? Propaganda?!
- learc83 8y agoYes. 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.
- jiminy_john 8y agoSolid stuff right here!
- colordrops 8y agoI'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that it's not clear that the advantage is so much as to be a relevant factor. I grew up in a very poor minority neighborhood and the language the teachers used in school was the same as the ones on the standardized test, so it's not like I wasn't prepared. It's almost insulting to think that dialect matters that much considering how much exposure everyone gets to the mainstream dialect. In China they've got a standard dialect and there doesn't appear to be any advantage for those that are from the area north of Beijing where the dialect originates.
- fiblye 8y agoAll 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 agoIt 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 agoThere 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 agoWhat 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.