3 ms·
> What do you think about ... how much harder IIT JEE math is Seems to me that there are only a couple of different ways somebody could feel about that. The f
by commandlinefan 5y ago
> What do you think about ... how much harder IIT JEE math is
Seems to me that there are only a couple of different ways somebody could feel about that. The first is to be opposed to the "the smarter you are, the more money you make/better you do in life" meritocratic egalitarianism that these tests support. The second is to support that ideal (whether you agree we're there or not), but insist that tests don't accurately measure intelligence.
Either way, while I can sort of see where the opponents are coming from, I don't see them offering many good alternatives. I don't think it's cosmically "fair" that being born to insanely rich parents leaves you better off in life than being born to unemployed drug addicts, but the only "solution" anybody's ever put forward is massive ongoing wealth redistribution which is demonstrably worse. Similarly, it's not necessarily fair that people who are born smart do better than people who are born stupid, but what do you do? Require as many stupid doctors as smart doctors? Demand that for every smart highway engineer, a stupid one be included as well?
I can also sympathize with people who insist that tests don't accurately measure intelligence - I've always done well on tests, so this system has worked out well for me, but I can see how somebody could be otherwise intelligent but unable to perform on tests. But again... what do you do? Just declare everybody equally intelligent and don't measure anything? Like it or not, tests do measure something that does correlate with that hard-to-quantify trait we call "intelligence" and while there are regrettable false positives as well as false negatives, it's the best we have.
So I wish our tests were harder so there'd be a more fine-grained stratification of actual ability, even if I ended up being closer to the middle than I am now - that would be ok, because a lot of other people would be closer to the middle too! A tests that accurately measured intelligence such that only the most intelligent people in the world could dominate it would necessarily be almost impossible to score perfectly on it, by definition. In the face of such a test, a 50% would be something to brag about and the top scorers would be off curing cancer or something for the benefit of all of us.
- brendoelfrendo 5y agoI guess it depends on what you want out of the test; if you want something meritocratic, what we find is that testing ends up reinforcing existing social strata more often than not, because wealth often correlates to factors like quality of education, which in turn correlate to test scores. A stupid rich person will always be stupid, but a smart rich person will probably have access to better schools, private tutoring, and test preparation resources. So there's the challenge that the anti-testing/testing reform crowd wants to solve: how do you call testing meritocratic when the equality of opportunity isn't there? And are we ok with that?
- sokoloff 5y agoIf we’re trying to measure something (say strength), should we measure that thing as directly as we can, or should we add a bunch of adjustments to make things more “fair”? Do we want to know how strong someone is, or how surprising it is that they’re as strong as they are given their starting point? If someone has a home gym, a personal trainer, and time to workout 2x/day, 6 days a week, how much should we penalize their results? Zero? 25%? 50%? I think that being strong as demonstrated on tests of strength is a valid (and the most valid I’m aware of) measure of “merit” in the context of strength. I think the same is true in other fields as well, including scholastics.
- paisawalla 5y ago> if you want something meritocratic, what we find is that testing ends up reinforcing existing social strata more often than not Compared to what? It's not a criticism to simply state that standardized testing fails to be perfectly meritocratic.
- harryh 5y ago"less than 14% of the variance in SAT scores can be explained by SES in two massive and representative samples" https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/please-think-critically-about-college https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/please-think-critically...
- commandlinefan 5y agoWhat does SES stand for? Your link doesn’t appear to define it and I can’t find it defined anywhere else.
- harryh 5y agosocioeconomic status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_status