Instead of improving the educational system, which is now immersed in Marxism, the latest thing is to dumb us down and distort standards even further. Part of the dumbing down process includes the new SAT.
If you learn math, reading, and writing as in the past, you’re racist, classist, sexist, and too white.
Since objectivity and meritocracy are now gone, lost in the sea of Marxist standards, so must the SATs go.
The SAT has already been diminished, so they’ve taken the next step.
Have you heard of digital SAT adaptive testing?
Well, this is what it is. The digital SAT will be broken into two sections for each subject. If you do poorly in section 1, the test will adapt to your lack of ability in section 2. If you do well, it will come up with harder questions in section 2.
To dumb it down, answering easy questions instead of harder ones will not impact your score. So, if you answer all the easy questions, you get scored as somebody who has answered the harder ones. However, some students can answer the hard ones, and they’ll get harder ones. Any who score well are really good. Students who get the easy ones will look terrible.
The Testmakers Say:
It’s a version of adaptive testing that ruins the concept. Everyone basically has a test tailor-made to him or her, which defeats the idea of standardized tests. They are meant to see how a person fares compared to others in their grade or age range.
The higher scorers will still score higher, and lower scorers will still score lower.
Adaptable tests work when they weight the harder and easier questions, but this is Marxism we’re discussing now.
However, the test makers claim the students score the same on the written test as they do on the digital test. Hard to believe.
No Penalty for Doing Well on Easier Questions
Students who are given easier questions in the second portion of the SAT “won’t be disadvantaged,” the College Board insists, the NY Post explains.
“You’ll be presented with questions tailored to your abilities. You won’t be presented with questions that are much too hard or too easy,” it said, according to its website.
“You can be confident that you’re going to end up with an accurate score. Your score will reflect your achievement and skills based on your answers to questions in both modules.”
Yeah, No, Bad Idea
Students who score well on the test will have to work a lot harder to do so; students who score poorly will have done so with easy questions and look even worse. Middle scores will be pulled toward the middle. This hollows out the middle, so students who score lower middle will go to the middle, and students who score upper middle will go down to the middle.
They want to play around with it, not to see what students are capable of, but to make us all the same with the same outcomes.
They can keep playing around with it until they make it even more unreliable for measuring skills and ability. Marxists don’t like competitiveness of any kind. Reality is not their bag.
It’s no longer any use because they’ve debased the entire test.
Prepare for DEI surgeons, and lots of luck with that.
it’s obvious this is aimed at a particular demographic, a demographic incapable (in general) of keeping up with the rest of us.
“Dumbing down of SATs”??? Is this a joke? Look who’s (Harris) running for POTUS. Look who is POTUS.
Some day soon we’ll stop to ponder what on earth’s this spell were under.
Students who are intelligent enough to have gotten a 1600 score in the past will now spend the entire time period trying to make sense of the equal outcome, minimal variability rules, resulting in a score of zero. This might be a good thing, because companies looking for highly intelligent employees will quickly learn to only interview those who got zero on their SAT.
I get it.
Used to be a very high score meant more scholarship money and less or no loans.
Now it means less scholarship money and more loans, but only the honest will pay, the rest get their loans forgiven.
Rewarding larcenous behavior only invites more evil.
Public education was derived and is used today for social conditioning. It was implemented to make mindless workers.
Get em used to the routine of punching in and punching out, and working for bureaucrats and bankers while their very young,and at the most critical time in their entire life for being imprinted with sociological traits .
Critical thinkers and those that dare to teach themselves, and that dare to tell it like it is, instead of the status quo s fictional but none the less “very popular consensus;” are now called dangerous individuals?..No amount of public education will make anyone intelligent. FACT.! Prove me wrong.
It doesn’t matter how much public education a person has attained, how wealthy they are, the color of their skin, their occupation. You either have it going on or you don’t, And there are many different types of intelligence, Whaaaaat?. You heard that correctly.
Howard Gardner’s nine types of intelligence include:
https://www.nordangliaeducation.com/pbis-prague/news/2020/12/09/the-nine-types-of-intelligence 20240809 23:51 GMT
Why are we paying teachers?
… who are trying to destroy what was the “American way of life”?
Good keep it coming. Only a matter of time until corporations realize there is no value in a college degree.
Correct, if you are referring to certain types of degrees.
Technical degrees and engineering degrees definitely have value for their professions.
A gender studies degree? Not so much unless you want to get a high paying job at a non-profit corporation funded by a Soros foundation or the government, or get a job as a college professor or in public education teaching such things. But then again even that has plenty of economic value to the student towards getting that kind of job if that’s what they want.
Maybe the right way to articulate it, is many liberal arts, social studies, and other degrees don’t have value to small businesses nor to private corporations that aren’t woke and reliant on government contracts that give weight or preference to companies that hire such graduates. Such used to be the engine of the economy, so most of such graduates had a harder time finding jobs.
I think small business and private corps in the past would hire people with degrees such as in liberal arts because it showed they had the ability to work hard, study, and complete difficult goals. It seems now many of those degrees only demonstrate the person is able to play the propaganda game, go along with liberal/communist ideologies to pass or get As, or be brainwashed and often scooted through via DEI initiatives whether they have any discipline or ability or not. So yes, in those cases, companies have or will figure out there is no value in a college degree in many subjects.
Comments are closed.