>
Posted on 08/02/2015 7:15:04 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Edited on 08/02/2015 7:28:30 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
This week, George Washington University announced it is adopting a "test-optional" admissions policy, becoming one of the largest private universities to allow prospective students to opt out of sending ACT or SAT scores.
GW joins other top-rated national universities such as Wake Forest and Brandeis, and national liberal arts colleges such as Bowdoin, Bates and Smith that do not require standardized test scores from applicants.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Let’s do Blacks first, Mexicans second , Then Arabs !! Then let white kids, who’s parents pay for it, go to hell?
Q: How does a college allow in minorities who are not as qualified as whites or asians and not leave a data trail?
A:
Of course, do away with anything that measures intelligence, effort during high school, skills in a learning environment, etc!
Obama wants to do away with them in adult life and the workplace (or the “welfare place”), so why not start early.
Some people can’t hack it until the standards are lowered or done away with altogether.
Columbia and Harvard obviously did that with Dorkbama, and we all know how successful he is, so what’s the problem?
These schools that want all this diversity better be careful what they wish for. They may end up regretting it.
...
BAHAHAHAHAHA
right....
How about considering a different theory... like .... um... they are not as smart?
If there was a “cultural bias” in those tests it would show up when Asians take them!
No they shouldn’t. There are already too many morons getting into college as it is.
"High-achieving"?
Sez who?
Are skill at telling bold-faced lies and ability to spew double-speak without breaking a sweat a prerequisite for getting a job as a college administrator?
(Rhetorical question only - of course they are...)
That’s my take ,, they suddenly came up with this when Harvard is being sued for discrimination in admissions?
So what questions are culturally biased? For a while the only solid example those opposed to the SAT regularly came up with was about a regatta.
Let’s just pass out college diplomas to high school graduates and avoid 4 more years of useless indoctrination.
Then, the kids who really want to learn something can attend “institutions of higher learning” for a nominal fee. These institutions could instruct students on true workforce skills and true scientific knowledge.
This would save employers the trouble of trying to determine who are actually the qualified employees.
RE: Columbia and Harvard obviously did that with Dorkbama, and we all know how successful he is, so what’s the problem?
I listened to Michael Medved’s show today ( replay ) and he insists that Obama was a brilliant student at Harvard.
He never told us why he believes so...
Tests don’t measure intelligence, they measure what your memory is like after X amount of years having BS shoved into it.
It’s like kids saying they’re going to college to get smarter. No, they go to college to specialize in a set of skills.
This is not an advantage to any institution. Smart students are an advantage. The SAT is by far the best way to identify them.
On the other hand, if you're trying to pull in students who will use up lots of administrative hours trying to keep these kids from failing, and you yearn to spend money on adjunct faculty who will teach "[Fill in the identity] Studies" courses you invent just for the dumber kids who can't handle the regular curriculum, then forget that SAT and go for it, baby.
You'll just have to get a lot of grant money from guilty corporations and tax money from Uncle Sam or your state to pay tuition for these kids who don't belong in college anyway—since besides not being that bright, most of them come from broken homes and therefore have no work habits or money either.
Just because this will result in a divided campus where some students work and succeed, while those incapable of college work hate them for it and do drugs, fight, and trash the buildings instead, shouldn't concern you at all. Is that clear?
As I recall, one of the reasons for the standardized tests was to show college admissions officers that student who were high achievers from rural areas or smaller cities in the midwest were capable of doing college level work.
Students from rural areas and/or the midwest did not graduate from prep schools nor had parents that did.
Sorry, not buying Medved’s story.
Cultural bias was always a crock for an excuse. How can math problems be culturally biased? That's half the SATs. If black students were doing poorly on the verbal part but equalling whites on the math part, they'd have a point. Blacks do poorly on both parts.
I would bet even the verbal part was never as biased as they made it out to be. If you're going to school for eight years, studying hard, and already speak English, the verbal part should not be a problem cultural differences or no cultural differences.
Obviously, the problems were not the tests. If the tests were faulty, then many students with low or middling SAT scores would be great scholars in college. The tests do a great job of predicting collegiate success.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.