"RichAsianKid" <richasiankid@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:8d8c2e14-b4c8-41ed-9b5c-5428d8d0f2fa@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Jan 20, 6:35 pm, "Phil Holman" <piholmanc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "RichAsianKid" <richasian...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>>
news:39c0eb2e-17fe-4cca-a67b-7320d1d14d95@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> > 2007 SAT Scores: http://i9.tinypic.com/6xrro5u.jpg
>>
>> > For now I just want to point out that Asians actually have a lower
>> > mean of 514 compared to whites of 527 in the critical reading part.
>> > HOWEVER, if
>> > you look at the score of 700 for critical reading, that only gets
>> > you
>> > 92th percentile for Asians, but 94%ile for whites. At 750, the
>> > level
>> > for admission for many higher ranked universities, that gets you 96
>> > percentile for Asians but 98%ile for whites. The corresponding
>> > figures
>> > for other ethnic groups are in fact almost all 99% for both 700 and
>> > 750 (save a couple of them). That suggests to me that there is not
>> > a
>> > dearth of Asians with high verbal skills; however you would not
>> > have
>> > gleaned this if you just look at the mean alone. Perhaps the median
>> > is
>> > a better way to go. The reason for a lower mean is that there a
>> > very
>> > wide lower end tail for Asians in
>> > the critical reading section. My guess is that (1) these are FOBs
>> > or
>> > foreign students and also (2) most of these are quite simply not
>> > higher IQ north east Asians, but rather SE Asians like Hmong,
>> > Cambodians and Pacific Islanders - groups that psychometrics
>> > suggests
>> > have lesser/lower
>> > cognitive abilities. In fact, the SAT data reveals that standard
>> > deviation for Asians is
>> > higher than whites, suggesting underlying
>> > heterogeneity.
>>
>> > You can do the same calculations for the above in math, and for the
>> > 700 level, the figures are 99 for blacks, 81 for Asians, 99 for
>> > Mexicans, 94 for whites, suggesting an even greater differential
>> > between the groups.
>>
>> > Like I said before, different groups achieve differently, with this
>> > table demonstrating that at the higher end, Asians are likely over-
>> > represented on a per capita basis. Blacks are clearly way
>> > underpresented - one study actually shows that in 2005 at the 700
>> > level for math only 0.7 percent of all black test takers scored at
>> > the
>> > 700 level, while only 0.16 percent of blacks scored higher than the
>> > 750 level. That's again the 2005 version. AFAIK there are no major
>> > changes in 2005 to 2007 in the other sections except the addition
>> > of
>> > the writing sample. The corresponding figures for Asians in
>> > percentile
>> > form is not available (though I've not done a thorough search)
>> > though
>> > the means certainly are, but the 2007 sample indicates the
>> > corresponding figures are 19% and 9%.
>>
>> > That is, roughly how many percent of Asians and blacks score over
>> > 700
>> > and 750 out of 800 in math?
>>
>> > Black -- 0.7% over 700, 0.16 percent over 750. (2005 data)
>> > Asian -- 19% over 700, 9% over 750. (2007 data)
>>
>> > In other words, if 1000 black students and 1000 Asian students take
>> > the SAT math, only 7 blacks but 190 Asians will score at the 700
>> > level
>> > or higher. That's a 27 times difference.
>>
>> > Now, moving up - if 1000 black students and 1000 Asian students
>> > take
>> > the SAT math, only 1.6 blacks but 90 Asians will score at 750 level
>> > or
>> > higher. That's 56 times (!!) difference.
>>
>> > Now you might think, that's amazing. Not yet. Look at the above
>> > figure - how many blacks are taking the SAT and how many Asians are
>> > taking the SAT? Blacks - roughly 160k, while Asians roughly 140k.
>> > Why
>> > is that im****tant? Asians are only ~4.2% of the US population,
>> > while
>> > blacks are roughly 12.3% of the population. If blacks take the SAT
>> > at
>> > the same pro****tion as Asians, you would have expected blacks to
>> > churn
>> > out 410k students taking the SAT. But no, only 160k
>> > are taking. Thus even amongst all test-takers they're grossly
>> > underrepresented -- by a factor of ~2.6.
>>
>> > Taking basal demographic rate into account we have this: Asians are
>> > 70
>> > times more likely to produce students who score higher than 700 on
>> > the
>> > SAT math, compared to blacks, and are 145.6 times more likely to
>> > produce students who score higher than 750 on the SAT math -- and a
>> > built-in
>> > factor of 2.6 is accounted for by blacks simply for whatever reason
>> > do
>> > not just take the SAT.
>>
>> > Also check outhttp://richasiankid.blogspot.com/
for some more
>> > stats.
>> > Some of the numbers do appear brutal, and many consider it too
>> > politically incorrect to talk about.
>>
>> > No wonder black education is in such crisis!! See, for instance,
>>
>> > http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html
>>
>> > An incredible quote: "Blacks from families with incomes of more
>> > than
>> > $100,000 had a
>> > mean SAT score that was 85 points below the mean score for whites
>> > from
>> > all income levels, 139 points below the mean score of whites from
>> > families at the same income level, and 10 points below the average
>> > score of white students from families whose income was less than
>> > $10,000."
>>
>> > I think the above will haunt the US for a long time to come. As the
>> > above link indicates, the gap for whites and blacks on the SAT has
>> > actually increased. For a while it has been thought that a credible
>> > ticket out of the ghetto is a good education. The results indicate
>> > that without strong affirmative action in place racial disparities
>> > will continue, and that this cannot be blamed on poverty or
>> > economics
>> > alone (see above).
>>
>> You missed out an explanation of cultural differences, in fact, an
>> account that doesn't even mention cultural differences is incomplete.
>> Please revise and resubmit.
>>
> And at the same time, an account that does not mention underlying
> intelligence differences is *also* incomplete. I certainly would not
> dismiss culture as possibly part of the explanation, but as E.O.
> Wilson once famously said, genes keep culture on a leash.
>
> Furthermore, Frey and Detterman wrote in "Scholastic *****sment or g?
> The Relation****p Between the Scholastic *****sment Test and General
> Cognitive Ability" in Psychological Science Volume 15 Issue 6 Page
> 373-378, June 2004
>
>
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00687.x?cookieSet=1&journalCode=psci
>
> "These studies indicate that the SAT is mainly a test of g."
>
> And we know that g is heritable.
>
> Last, the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study indicates to us that
> blacks who are adopted to white families at a very early age continue
> to do poorly be it IQ, GPA, School Rank, or School Aptitude.
Do you think it matters from which socio-economic strata they were
adopted from and the fact that they were still black? Did they score
better than the siblings they left behind? The possibility of
confounding is big and the ability to apply good controls is small.
> Interestingly, mixed race children do intermediately well between
> blacks and whites. This is counterintuitive and is something that a
> culture-only explanation will have some problems explaining,
Culture only.....who mentioned that? Oh, you did; I'm vying for equal
billing.
for (1)
> mixed race children are often seen by society as black, not half-and-
> half; (2) if anything mixed race children will face even more of an
> identity crisis as they're often sources of jeer in schools. In fact
> mixed-race children suffer even more than their monoracial
> counterparts: http://i15.tinypic.com/716vjuo.jpg
>
> Achievement findings are found here:
>
> http://i14.tinypic.com/6kpn2hj.jpg
>
> Reference: Udry JR, Li RM, Hendrickson-Smith J: Health and behavior
> risks of adolescents with mixed-race identity. Am J Public Health
> 2003, 93:1865-1870.
>
> Total sample size: 83,135 + 18,924, based on the National Longitudinal
> Study of Adolescent Health from grades 7 through 12 during 1994-1995.
>
> Sample size is HUGE.
>
> Below listed are percentages of children reaching 75th percentile GPA
> Scores - (you would expect 25% to do so)
>
> "Pure"
>
> White - 32.27 Black - 15.45 American Indian - 14.97 Asian 43.16
>
> "Mixed" race
>
> White/black 24.19
> White/American Indian 27.10
> White/Asian 37.58
> Black/American Indian 18.79
> Black/Asian 18.57
> Asian/American Indian 21.82
Do you think those mixed race children were subject to any cultural
differences from their monoracial counterparts. Is identity crisis
synonymous with low educational achievement?
What do you expect of the least motivated when competing in a race
organized and marshaled by those who place a much higher value on the
outcome?
Phil H
|
