5 ms·

Do you have unbiased sources that indicate otherwise?

by unclebucknasty 5y ago

throw_m239339 5y ago
> Do you have unbiased sources that indicate otherwise? The burden of proof lies with the person making a claim.
- unclebucknasty 5y ago
  >The burden of proof lies with the person making a claim. Exactly. And, in this case, that's you. The OP stated: "Standardized test scores do very little to predict college success". He's refuting a claim, not making one. The claim he's refuting is that standardized tests are significant predictors of college success. If you're asserting the claim is instead true, then please provide evidence that supports it.
  - throw_m239339 5y ago
    > Exactly. And, in this case, that's you. > The OP stated: "Standardized test scores do very little to predict college success". > He's refuting a claim, not making one. > The claim he's refuting is that standardized tests are significant predictors of college success. > If you're asserting the claim is instead true, then please provide evidence that supports it. I did not make any claim in that specific comment thread to begin with. I did not assert anything either. I'm asking the comment I directly answered to, to provide sources of the claims they made. not any parent. I never made any claims myself in that discussion thread. This is not reddit, please don't engage into these pointless tactics that add absolutely nothing to the discussion. You have absolutely nothing to contribute but useless rhetoric. I asked for sources to whomever I responded to, nothing else. If YOU want sources, then ask whoever made the point you are interested in yourself, not me. zarkov99 wrote a message, SquishyPanda23 answered making a claim, I'm interested in SquishyPanda23 sourcing his claim. If you want zarkov99 to source his claim, then ask him directly, not me. Just don't waste my time with these pointless comments of yours.
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      >This is not reddit I've been on HN for several years. The quality was once much higher than it is now, but HNers have always been willing to call out posturing and logical holes. >You have absolutely nothing to contribute but useless rhetoric. I asked for sources to whomever I responded to,.. Right. And if you already agreed with SquishyPanda's statement, you would not have requested a source. So, I just asked you to source why you believe what you believe. Why is that any different? In fact, that answer would add more to the thread. I mean, if you believe standardized tests are valid for the stated purposes, then that's the positive assertion. Have you questioned it? If not, then why not? If so, then what did you conclude and on what evidence? Please share. >Just don't waste my time with these pointless comments of yours. To be fair, I asked you for a source, just as you did of someone else. You wasted your own time with your unsolicited rant.
  - gameman144 5y ago
    Wait, am I missing something? The child comment didn't refute the OP's point. OP's point was "This sucks, they're doing away with objective criteria." Child comment's points was "They are indeed doing away with objective criteria. These criteria are not valuable though " The only claim made there was the child comment's claim that these (admittedly objective) criteria are not valuable. That claim was not backed up.
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      >OP's point was "This sucks, they're doing away with objective criteria." Actually, standardized testing does not represent objective criteria for a number of reasons, so that's an incorrect assumption. But, my point was why do we also just assume that it "sucks" to do away with it? Where's the evidence that they are effective criteria? If we're demanding proof that they are not effective, then it's fair to question how we established they are effective in the first place. Else, it's really just a default assumption that represents a positive assertion (i.e. an unsubstantiated claim).

Do you have unbiased sources that indicate otherwise?

throw_m239339 5y ago

> Do you have unbiased sources that indicate otherwise? The burden of proof lies with the person making a claim.

unclebucknasty 5y ago
>The burden of proof lies with the person making a claim. Exactly. And, in this case, that's you. The OP stated: "Standardized test scores do very little to predict college success". He's refuting a claim, not making one. The claim he's refuting is that standardized tests are significant predictors of college success. If you're asserting the claim is instead true, then please provide evidence that supports it.
- throw_m239339 5y ago
  > Exactly. And, in this case, that's you. > The OP stated: "Standardized test scores do very little to predict college success". > He's refuting a claim, not making one. > The claim he's refuting is that standardized tests are significant predictors of college success. > If you're asserting the claim is instead true, then please provide evidence that supports it. I did not make any claim in that specific comment thread to begin with. I did not assert anything either. I'm asking the comment I directly answered to, to provide sources of the claims they made. not any parent. I never made any claims myself in that discussion thread. This is not reddit, please don't engage into these pointless tactics that add absolutely nothing to the discussion. You have absolutely nothing to contribute but useless rhetoric. I asked for sources to whomever I responded to, nothing else. If YOU want sources, then ask whoever made the point you are interested in yourself, not me. zarkov99 wrote a message, SquishyPanda23 answered making a claim, I'm interested in SquishyPanda23 sourcing his claim. If you want zarkov99 to source his claim, then ask him directly, not me. Just don't waste my time with these pointless comments of yours.
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    >This is not reddit I've been on HN for several years. The quality was once much higher than it is now, but HNers have always been willing to call out posturing and logical holes. >You have absolutely nothing to contribute but useless rhetoric. I asked for sources to whomever I responded to,.. Right. And if you already agreed with SquishyPanda's statement, you would not have requested a source. So, I just asked you to source why you believe what you believe. Why is that any different? In fact, that answer would add more to the thread. I mean, if you believe standardized tests are valid for the stated purposes, then that's the positive assertion. Have you questioned it? If not, then why not? If so, then what did you conclude and on what evidence? Please share. >Just don't waste my time with these pointless comments of yours. To be fair, I asked you for a source, just as you did of someone else. You wasted your own time with your unsolicited rant.
- gameman144 5y ago
  Wait, am I missing something? The child comment didn't refute the OP's point. OP's point was "This sucks, they're doing away with objective criteria." Child comment's points was "They are indeed doing away with objective criteria. These criteria are not valuable though " The only claim made there was the child comment's claim that these (admittedly objective) criteria are not valuable. That claim was not backed up.
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    >OP's point was "This sucks, they're doing away with objective criteria." Actually, standardized testing does not represent objective criteria for a number of reasons, so that's an incorrect assumption. But, my point was why do we also just assume that it "sucks" to do away with it? Where's the evidence that they are effective criteria? If we're demanding proof that they are not effective, then it's fair to question how we established they are effective in the first place. Else, it's really just a default assumption that represents a positive assertion (i.e. an unsubstantiated claim).