From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.college
Subject: Re: Prop 48...
Date: 25 Jul 92 09:02:15 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Jul25.082913.7452@u.washington.edu>, dasaxe@milton.u.washington.edu (Daniel Perreault) writes:
> Now let's get a grip here GaRy, I don't believe the original writer in any
> way implied that there are no cultural biases, in fact I believe he said
> "People have advantages and disadvantages whereever they come from..." In

 Which is bullshit. The fact is, some of us simply do not suffer the same
level of cultural bias as others do...

> otherwords, that some people have advantages(pick an ethnic majority) and
> some people have disadvantages(pick an ethnic minority).

 Again - bullshit. This is easy for someone who falls into the
majority to claim. The reality is that there are many individuals who
have much greater disadvantages than you and I and most readers of this group.

> However, we are not talking about brain surgery here GaRy, I assume you took
> the SAT at some point in your educational career, getting a 700 total score
> is a pretty minimal task. You may try to argue that the people taking the
> test, say first generation asians, have a disadvantage because they don't
> read english well, but the test can be administered in several languages,
> and besides like it or not statistically the people that are getting nailed
> here are predominantly black, and I suspect few of them are not native
> english speakers.

 Plase give me this again - most are black and most are not native english
speakers? Is that what you said? If so, take a look at the avg. SAT scores for
say the past 20 years or so... it really is unclear to me what your point is
here....

> So lets say, these people cannot relate to the types of questions on the
> exam. Ok, lets assume they don't answer shit on the verbal, that gives them
> 200 points, so they have to make up 500 points on the Math. Or about 50
> points above the national average. This should be achievable for ANYONE
> who takes the test seriously. 

 I love this - the bottom line for you folks is " anyone could do it" but
the reality of it is "anyone like *me* could do it so they must be lesser than
I am" - I think it is you who should get a grip and realize that there are
many individuals who come from different backgrounds and experiences
than you do and who find the SATs a relatively foreign experience. As to the
idea that the "math" sections of the exam being unbiased - get a grip - some
questions are but they still require more than a simple evaluation of an 
equation or two...

> If a person were so mathematically inept that
> they lack the ability to get a 500 on the Math with concerted effort, ignoring
> the verbal does not belong in college. 

 Again, you assume the bias - your stmt is clear in that you are willing
to accept the test as is simply because of annecdotal reasoning - after
all you passed it so it must be fair and unbiased...

> College is not a right, that is why
> there is competative entry to 4 year institutions. 

 Who do you think you're talking to here? 4 year universities are a dime a
dozen - people who can't pass SATs are in universities - it just takes them a 
longer route to get there - just look at UCLA...

> But lets go back to the test GaRy, lets look at the verbal section for a
> minute. Even those people who contend the test is biased argue that the
> questions that are so are primarily ones involving reading conprehension and
> interpretation. That leaves several sections on simple vocabulary that are
> not significantly biased. Certainly not enough to keep someone from getting
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 Tell me what do you base this on other than your own impressions? Anything?
Anything at all?

> Besides GaRy, those experts who claim the tests are biased do not contend
> that the injured party is at such a disadvantage that they cannot get a
> 700
 
Really? What do they say - please tell me - I'd appreciate the references
if possible...

>So what is the problem? Is it the myriad people who pander to these athletically
> gifted youth in junior high and convince them the only place they need to work
> is on the court? Or the teachers and systems that let them get as far as
> high school graduation without the ability to get 700 on an SAT? Or idiots
> on computers who tell them that they are being racially discriminated against
> by a test so it isn't fair and thus they don't have to do shit?

 The racism in the above is so blatent that I need not respond. Give Rush 
Limbaugh a call and maybe he'll agree with you.... that's right the problem
with blacks is thaqt we tell *them* that they have things tough and so
they don't need to do "shit"...

> Take your pick GaRy, but you tell me you honestly believe that someone with
> a high school education, no learning disability and a concerted desire to
> get at least 700 on an SAT who speaks english as thier native language
> couldn't do so. I don't believe it, tell me why you do.

 Because I've lived it. I came from the inner city - I went to school
with African-americans, hispanics and was in fact a minority in my
inner-city high-school. I did well on my exams but it had little to do with
my real-life experience and had much more to do with my family and
their views of what was the "norm" and acceptable. Beyond that, I've had
too many years of Sociology and Higher Education courses - many of which
looked at *scientific* studies of this issue and came to the conclusion that
tests such as the SAT are biased in terms of culture (perhaps not the intention
but biased none the less)....

			gln

Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.college