Quoting Krimel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [Platt] > You can't put dumbing down aside in comparing SAT and other like scores from > one generation to the next. > > [Krimel] > As far as I know the SATs are more difficult now than they were in the past. > When I took it there was only the math and science portion. I believe they > have added two additional sections to the test since then including a > writing sample. I seem to recall accusations of cultural bias in the '70s as > people became more aware of such things. I believe that the sort of charge > you make surfaced then. But I don't think those charges were well informed > then or now. > > In any case you should expect generational difference in longitudinal > studies. They were clear in the example you provided. Maybe you could > provide an example of this dumbing down of which you speak.
"Longitudinal studies?" I have no idea what you are talking about. Color me dumb. As for dumbing down the SAT, take a look at: http://www.nationalreview.com/contributors/kurtz032502.shtml > [Platt] > Not bad. Glad to see I have made myself reasonably clear. But instead of the > term "pollsters" which suggests that only companies like Gallup can > determine depth of consciousness, I would prefer the word "surveys." > > [Krimel] > You thing a people's depth of consciousness can be measured through opinion > polls? Then why would anyone criticize a politician for attending to them? Didn't I just say I'm not talking about "polls?" Sometimes you just don't read. > [Platt] > Also, I would say that depth of consciousness consists of cultural literacy > instead of "entirely of specific facts" because the latter suggests mere > rote recitation rather than understanding. > > [Krimel] > So now it's understanding facts about culture that matters. Which culture > should we test to measure depth of consciousness? The culture we see in > sitcoms? The culture we see in our schools; in our communities; the culture > of dead white men. How do you test understanding of culture between > California and Nebraska? The Western culture. What else? And it's not "understanding facts." It's understanding the philosophies and broad historical movements that got us to where we are today. > [Platt] > Do you really believe there's a possibility you won't die? What about the > probability that you were born and that the cause was, well, you know ... ? > > [Krimel] > I think there is a high degree of probability that I will die. The odds > against are like one in billions but you never can tell. The probability > that I was born is determined largely by the present. Again there is a > probability against it that I would recon in trillions to one. I don't see > the payoff in playing odds like that. Krim thinks there's a chance he won't die. Get that everybody? > As for the cause? That's up for grabs. My dad used to lament that it was > because The Pill had not been invented at the time. My mom used to act like > he was kidding but she never effectively denied it. Krim thinks there's a chance he was born from an immaculate conception. Intelligent design is 99.9 percent true compared to Krim's "truths." > Do you believe absolutely that you were born and will die? Absolutely. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
