3 ms·
> the fact that paying huge money for tutoring only results in minor score improvements This might be true in aggregate, but I’ve seen data that says otherwise
by csa 3y ago
> the fact that paying huge money for tutoring only results in minor score improvements
This might be true in aggregate, but I’ve seen data that says otherwise (buddy owns a test prep school). The keys are that the student wants the test prep and that the student has room to grow (i.e., not already near the top, where increases are capped).
Middle of the pack students can gain 50-150 points per skill (this is a lot).
> the implications that poor Asian immigrants were able to outscore other demographics regardless of income, which goes against modern academia's favored nurture over nature mindset
Is this implying that Asian immigrants do better because of genetics (nature)?
The non-agenda-based research on this topic is pretty clear that Asian immigrant success is mostly about a culture of schooling and learning in Asian communities. This includes things like tutoring, “cram schools”, and test prep.
Here is an example of research/views from outside the US:
https://www.otago.ac.nz/deepsouth/vol2no1/setsuo.html https://www.otago.ac.nz/deepsouth/vol2no1/setsuo.html
Almost all academic success is built on a culture of learning of some sort (e.g., parental involvement in schooling, reading to kids, etc.). Note that this is true regardless of race. The higher quality (non-agenda-based) research in this area all focuses on how this culture of learning can be fostered, with special focus on low SES (low socio-economic status) families regardless of race.
> destroys the basis for trillions in social programs
> Standardized tests effectively threaten the entire house of cards
Programs like Head Start in the US have measurable positive impact:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-long-term-impact-of-the-head-start-program/ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-long-term-impact-of-t...
Fwiw, I actually agree that a lot of research in education is non-replicable, agenda-based bullshit, but your comments here go against both the better research and fairly substantial anecdotal evidence (my buddy’s test prep program).
- legolas2412 3y ago> Programs like Head Start in the US have measurable positive impact: Something can have an unjustified basis, but have a measurable positive impact. Just because the unjustified basis of race was correlated with income. But using the justified basis of income and wealth will not only lead to even more measurable positive impact, it will also be fair.
- fngjdflmdflg 3y ago>Is this implying that Asian immigrants do better because of genetics (nature)? Yes, that is very likely true. I would go as far as to say that the "nurture" side of this coin is to a large extent an indirect result of nature as well.
- csa 3y ago> Yes, that is very likely true. I would go as far as to say that the "nurture" side of this coin is to a large extent an indirect result of nature as well. I’m not sure if you’re Asian or have lived in Asia, but… I have lived and worked in East Asia for 9 years, and I have worked with Asians (both Asian-Americans and Asian immigrants) for decades more, and I will just say that this strikes me as patently untrue. East Asians (from East Asia) are often better educated as a group, but what they do with that knowledge is often underwhelming. If a study were to control for things that correlate with intelligence like “was able to work with / game a system that led to immigration”, then I might agree that certain immigrants might have IQ that skews slightly higher. That said, the predictive variable there would not be race, but the ability to understand and work successfully within a complex system.