1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Athletes have lower test scores

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by novelist_wannabe, Dec 28, 2008.

  1. Grimace

    Grimace Guest

    Unless you have first-hand experience, or know someone who does (my sister's an elementary school teacher at a low-income school), it's impossible to understand what a huge disadvantage these kids start out with before their first day of kindergarten.

    My sister teaches a dropout prevention class -- for third graders! It's a sad situation that defies a simple solution.
     
  2. Goldeaston

    Goldeaston Guest

    In other words, it's the culture with the problem, not the tests.

    And College Journo, to tap that potential, one needs a work ethic. That is instilled at home. This all goes back to values and communities. They are where the problems lie. Most of these downtrodden communities are large cities, which have been re-electing the same governments for years and years.
     
  3. Right. But these are kids. And there are probably ways to identify their innate intelligence other than making them memorize analogies.

    Why throw them to the wolves when we can figure out a way to recognize the diamonds in the rough, and possibly educationally rehabilitate them?

    This isn't government charity. It's an investment in our country's future.
     
  4. Goldeaston

    Goldeaston Guest

    I agree. But when their own culture discourages the type of advancement you're seeking, how is it even possible? This has to start from within. Until the many start giving a shit, the few are unfortunately not going to stand much of a chance. ... And until the single-parent families become the exception, and the baby daddies stop spreading their seed at every turn, and until so many other things, the few are going to have to rise on their own. There can't be family values until there are actually some families.
     
  5. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    The perceived choice is ditch digger or NBA Super Star. Let's remove both options and see what happens
     
  6. shotglass

    shotglass Guest

    Interesting thought, one which I agree with -- partly.

    The SATs, in my mind, test that baseline level you're speaking of up to, say, an 1100 score or so.

    It's the difference between 1100 and 1600 where you get into cultural biases, general societal knowledge, etc. In other words, a kid should be able to get up to 1100 without knowing which fork to use at the banquet table.

    And in that regard, if a kid cannot at least be knocking on the door of 1000 on this standardized test, I have grave doubts about his/her ability to handle the college workload over the long haul. At least, without the specialized help that Division I athletes normally are afforded.
     
  7. Yep. Which opens up an even bigger can of worms. This is complicated shit, no doubt. But I try to keep in mind that all of these things aren't mutually exclusive (in a perfect world, of course, where money is no object).

    But we have to start saving the kids. Have to. For our country's sake. I'm telling you, "early childhood education" is going to be a huge buzzword over the next four years, and it will be a godsend to our country.

    However, that doesn't mean that you can just dismiss everyone from the ages of 6 to 17 like we've been doing for too long with SAT scores, etc., etc.
     
  8. These kids don't even know if there is going to be dinner on the table that night. They don't know if they'll be able to get into their house. They have moms at home who tell them what they learn in school is "all boollshit."

    And you think the expectation should still be a 1000?

    Again, I ask. Could Johnny Swimstar in Westchester County get around the Bronx on the city bus?

    These kids are inherently no smarter or dumber than Suzie Softball in Santa Monica.
     
  9. shotglass

    shotglass Guest

    What I think, Waylon, is that if these kids can't get 1000, their educational problems are bigger than whatever cultural biases there are on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. There's a wiiiiide range from 800 to 1600.
     
  10. PeteyPirate

    PeteyPirate Guest

    There is no consensus as to whether the SAT is predictive of how a student will perform. So the test might be not only biased, but useless for a university's purposes.

    http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/592879.html
     
  11. I think that the SUNY system recently unveiled a study that contradicts this. That, in fact, the test is indeed predictive.
     
  12. Again, it tests what you learned in school. Not intelligence.

    Imagine some inner-city kid wanting to take the SAT, and his mom is telling him that it's "boolshit." Which happens. Every day.

    Remember the Chris Rock routine? About people being happier for you when you get out of jail than when you earn a degree in the inner-city? It's 100 percent true.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page