3 ms·

> Comparing performance on entrance exams is more consistent with how private sector employers evaluate non-STEM college graduates. How exactly is that? I've n

> Comparing performance on entrance exams is more consistent with how private sector employers evaluate non-STEM college graduates. How exactly is that? I've not heard of an employer asking for SAT/ACT scores for college grads. I've heard of reporting GPA and talking about internship/club roles, but never standardized test scores taken before college. > Those 47% of teachers scoring in the bottom third of the SAT/ACT aren't going to be in the running for very high-paying jobs almost regardless of their college performance. Seriously? You could score in the middle or poorly on a standardized test and go on to do extremely well in college and the workforce. Further, scoring high on SAT/ACT tests doesn't indicate you will do well in college or the workforce. Employers are almost always looking for a couple of factors for potential hires, not just one, and we would expect teacher hires to be no different in that regard.

rayiner 13y ago
I'm necessarily talking about aggregates here. Bottom 1/3 on the SAT is around 900/1600 on the SAT scale used between 1995 and 2005. Generally people who score in that range go to a college that does not offer a great prospect of making more than your average college graduate, even with a very good (but not extraordinary) performance in college. Starting salary for a teacher in Chicago with just a BA is almost $50k/year with very good benefits. There are jobs for non-STEM majors that pay that or substantially higher, but the college options available with that kind of SAT score put you at a great handicap for those jobs. Again, we're talking about aggregates here, not individuals. Lots of people do poorly on the SAT and end up wealthy. But if we're talking about a group where 47% perform in the bottom 1/3 of the SAT, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that this group's expected salary outside of teaching is substantially lower than for the average college graduate, regardless of the fact that individuals may outperform their entrance exams.
- king_jester 13y ago
  > I'm necessarily talking about aggregates here. Bottom 1/3 on the SAT is around 900/1600 on the SAT scale used between 1995 and 2005. Generally people who score in that range go to a college that does not offer a great prospect of making more than your average college graduate, even with a very good (but not extraordinary) performance in college. Its true that earning such a score may be more limiting in what colleges you can attend, but the reality is that ivy league and highly competitive schools are not within the range of most people for a variety of reasons. However, those graduates are skilled and make excellent employees and we as a society depend on a college system that is accessible to have a better skilled workforce. In terms of how this relates to quality of teachers, that some scored low on SAT/ACT and went to different kinds of colleges doesn't mean they are not qualified or successful as teachers. > Starting salary for a teacher in Chicago with just a BA is almost $50k/year with very good benefits. There are jobs for non-STEM majors that pay that or substantially higher, but the college options available with that kind of SAT score put you at a great handicap for those jobs. Of course, its not just the college you attend that opens up those higher paying non-STEM jobs to you, it also highly depends on what field you went into, current economic conditions when you start looking for employment, overall availability of positions, etc. Over the last 4 years we have seen that even attending a more competitive school or highly esteemed school isn't enough to get over some of the external difficulties in finding a job in some fields. > Again, we're talking about aggregates here, not individuals. Lots of people do poorly on the SAT and end up wealthy. But if we're talking about a group where 47% perform in the bottom 1/3 of the SAT, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that this group's expected salary outside of teaching is substantially lower than for the average college graduate, regardless of the fact that individuals may outperform their entrance exams. We aren't talking about those that become wealthy, we are talking about low SAT/ACT scorers who go on to get a college degree at an accredited institution. It is unreasonable to say that low scorers are going to earn less than high scorers that attend the same class of institution or that the low scorers are less qualified from the high scorers in the same field that attended the same class of institution. Fundamentally, degree snobbery isn't helpful here. We require a large body of qualified teacher and an environment where those teachers can succeed. Like any profession, there are bad teachers, but calling all teachers bad because they didn't achieve an academically-defined test score that doesn't necessarily have a present bearing on their ability to be a teaching professional is silly.

rayiner 13y ago

I'm necessarily talking about aggregates here. Bottom 1/3 on the SAT is around 900/1600 on the SAT scale used between 1995 and 2005. Generally people who score in that range go to a college that does not offer a great prospect of making more than your average college graduate, even with a very good (but not extraordinary) performance in college. Starting salary for a teacher in Chicago with just a BA is almost $50k/year with very good benefits. There are jobs for non-STEM majors that pay that or substantially higher, but the college options available with that kind of SAT score put you at a great handicap for those jobs. Again, we're talking about aggregates here, not individuals. Lots of people do poorly on the SAT and end up wealthy. But if we're talking about a group where 47% perform in the bottom 1/3 of the SAT, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that this group's expected salary outside of teaching is substantially lower than for the average college graduate, regardless of the fact that individuals may outperform their entrance exams.

king_jester 13y ago
> I'm necessarily talking about aggregates here. Bottom 1/3 on the SAT is around 900/1600 on the SAT scale used between 1995 and 2005. Generally people who score in that range go to a college that does not offer a great prospect of making more than your average college graduate, even with a very good (but not extraordinary) performance in college. Its true that earning such a score may be more limiting in what colleges you can attend, but the reality is that ivy league and highly competitive schools are not within the range of most people for a variety of reasons. However, those graduates are skilled and make excellent employees and we as a society depend on a college system that is accessible to have a better skilled workforce. In terms of how this relates to quality of teachers, that some scored low on SAT/ACT and went to different kinds of colleges doesn't mean they are not qualified or successful as teachers. > Starting salary for a teacher in Chicago with just a BA is almost $50k/year with very good benefits. There are jobs for non-STEM majors that pay that or substantially higher, but the college options available with that kind of SAT score put you at a great handicap for those jobs. Of course, its not just the college you attend that opens up those higher paying non-STEM jobs to you, it also highly depends on what field you went into, current economic conditions when you start looking for employment, overall availability of positions, etc. Over the last 4 years we have seen that even attending a more competitive school or highly esteemed school isn't enough to get over some of the external difficulties in finding a job in some fields. > Again, we're talking about aggregates here, not individuals. Lots of people do poorly on the SAT and end up wealthy. But if we're talking about a group where 47% perform in the bottom 1/3 of the SAT, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that this group's expected salary outside of teaching is substantially lower than for the average college graduate, regardless of the fact that individuals may outperform their entrance exams. We aren't talking about those that become wealthy, we are talking about low SAT/ACT scorers who go on to get a college degree at an accredited institution. It is unreasonable to say that low scorers are going to earn less than high scorers that attend the same class of institution or that the low scorers are less qualified from the high scorers in the same field that attended the same class of institution. Fundamentally, degree snobbery isn't helpful here. We require a large body of qualified teacher and an environment where those teachers can succeed. Like any profession, there are bad teachers, but calling all teachers bad because they didn't achieve an academically-defined test score that doesn't necessarily have a present bearing on their ability to be a teaching professional is silly.