New SAT tests have "Adversity Scoring". Is this doing kids a disservice?

mace1229 said:

I used to think there wasn't really such a thing as a biased question or that income couldn't really impact your education. Then I became a teacher in South-Central LA. That definitely does exist, and probably a much larger issue than most think, especially in neighborhoods like South-Central. 
But to your question, does an adversity score help anyone? I don't think so. These tests are intended to be used as a basis for college readiness. If you put the SAT on a "curve" based on your background, you are just setting that person up for failure in college. Ask any college professor and they'll tell you every year their incoming freshmen get worse and worse. Unfortunately it doesn't matter what your background is, if you aren't prepared for college you can be setting yourself up for failure. Some of these standardized tests can actually be used to as placement, you will take remedial classes before taking a real college course.
If not in college, then when do we expect someone to hold their own? If we do it for college, then their first job in the real world is going to be that much tougher when they are suddenly forced to realize they have the same expectations as everyone else. I see it now, we have IEPs for far too many kids to help them through high school and it doesn't help prepare many them, its a crutch they learn to rely on. This may have the same effect. 

brianlux said:

I'm no longer teaching but in the past have put in a total of about 9 years teaching in various capacities including grade schools and community college. 

My thinking is that "adversity scoring" is an OK idea in terms of intentions, but not in terms of finding a good, viable, long-term solution.  I think in a way it's putting the cart before the horse.  I would propose this problem be tackled in two stages:

1.  Make SAT test fair for all cultural groups and socio-economic levels through careful wording of test questions.  A misunderstood question due to wording does not necessarily reflect intelligence or lack thereof.  So in other words, reduce the question biases as much as possible.

2.  Secondly, I think we would do well to work toward eliminating as much as possible conditions that create adversity in the first place.  Many will argue that this is unrealistic.  "There always have been and always will be the poor", they will say.  Yes, true, but what are we doing to reduce the discrepancies in socio-economic levels?  Doing what we can to reduce discrimination, prejudice and bigotry is the most important first step.  Recognizing and facing our own biases is the first part of that process.  What I'm proposing is a long, uphill task, but I think it's one worth striving for.

And I would add two other things:

1.  Demand that teaching be treated as, and carried out as a profession, not a baby sitting job.  Teachers need to be trained at a higher level in America than they are and then compensated at an appropriate professional level.  Believe me, I've seen some very incompetent people working in this field. 

2.  Likewise, if not demand then at least strongly encourage students to excel both in scholastic learning as well as in social skills and creativity.  Eliminate the bullshit "everyone is a winner" nonsense (we've discussed this in HFD's excellent thread on "inclusion").  Get real.  In the larger sense, we in America have failed at our job of educating our youth and, as a result, our youth are failing as well.  The "dumbing down" of America is a real and tragic condition.

mace1229 said:

brianlux said:

I'm no longer teaching but in the past have put in a total of about 9 years teaching in various capacities including grade schools and community college. 

My thinking is that "adversity scoring" is an OK idea in terms of intentions, but not in terms of finding a good, viable, long-term solution.  I think in a way it's putting the cart before the horse.  I would propose this problem be tackled in two stages:

1.  Make SAT test fair for all cultural groups and socio-economic levels through careful wording of test questions.  A misunderstood question due to wording does not necessarily reflect intelligence or lack thereof.  So in other words, reduce the question biases as much as possible.

2.  Secondly, I think we would do well to work toward eliminating as much as possible conditions that create adversity in the first place.  Many will argue that this is unrealistic.  "There always have been and always will be the poor", they will say.  Yes, true, but what are we doing to reduce the discrepancies in socio-economic levels?  Doing what we can to reduce discrimination, prejudice and bigotry is the most important first step.  Recognizing and facing our own biases is the first part of that process.  What I'm proposing is a long, uphill task, but I think it's one worth striving for.

And I would add two other things:

1.  Demand that teaching be treated as, and carried out as a profession, not a baby sitting job.  Teachers need to be trained at a higher level in America than they are and then compensated at an appropriate professional level.  Believe me, I've seen some very incompetent people working in this field. 

2.  Likewise, if not demand then at least strongly encourage students to excel both in scholastic learning as well as in social skills and creativity.  Eliminate the bullshit "everyone is a winner" nonsense (we've discussed this in HFD's excellent thread on "inclusion").  Get real.  In the larger sense, we in America have failed at our job of educating our youth and, as a result, our youth are failing as well.  The "dumbing down" of America is a real and tragic condition.

In response to your second #1.
its the culture and parents that treat teaching as a babysitting job. An example would be this time last year we had teacher walkouts in a state that’s ranked among the worst in teacher pay. The letters to the editor in the local paper were laughable. Parents complained mostly about having to find childcare and couldn’t care less about the outdated buildings and teacher pay they were fighting for. Parents expect teachers to parent their kids more than teach.
in terms of training, there’s a ton of training. Every few years the state requires more professional development, more certificates, more everything (that it almost always paid for out of pocket by the teacher). For example Colorado just passed a law (I don’t know if it’s law, a bill, or whatever) that teachers must obtain 3 college credits or 45 hours training in teaching language learners when they renew. I’m going to wind up paying about $500 just to meet that one requirement with training I have to pay for on my own time and dime. Most new teachers come into the profession with a MA in education, but yet get average pay below what most college grads get. A teacher with a master’s and 10 years of experience will make about 50k in my city. Less education or less experience will be less. It’s nearly impossible to support a family on 50k here. 
Teachers get treated less and less like a profession and more like baby sitters or community service. But that’s on recent culture, not the teachers. 

tempo_n_groove said:

brianlux said:

mace1229 said:

brianlux said:

I'm no longer teaching but in the past have put in a total of about 9 years teaching in various capacities including grade schools and community college. 

My thinking is that "adversity scoring" is an OK idea in terms of intentions, but not in terms of finding a good, viable, long-term solution.  I think in a way it's putting the cart before the horse.  I would propose this problem be tackled in two stages:

1.  Make SAT test fair for all cultural groups and socio-economic levels through careful wording of test questions.  A misunderstood question due to wording does not necessarily reflect intelligence or lack thereof.  So in other words, reduce the question biases as much as possible.

2.  Secondly, I think we would do well to work toward eliminating as much as possible conditions that create adversity in the first place.  Many will argue that this is unrealistic.  "There always have been and always will be the poor", they will say.  Yes, true, but what are we doing to reduce the discrepancies in socio-economic levels?  Doing what we can to reduce discrimination, prejudice and bigotry is the most important first step.  Recognizing and facing our own biases is the first part of that process.  What I'm proposing is a long, uphill task, but I think it's one worth striving for.

And I would add two other things:

1.  Demand that teaching be treated as, and carried out as a profession, not a baby sitting job.  Teachers need to be trained at a higher level in America than they are and then compensated at an appropriate professional level.  Believe me, I've seen some very incompetent people working in this field. 

2.  Likewise, if not demand then at least strongly encourage students to excel both in scholastic learning as well as in social skills and creativity.  Eliminate the bullshit "everyone is a winner" nonsense (we've discussed this in HFD's excellent thread on "inclusion").  Get real.  In the larger sense, we in America have failed at our job of educating our youth and, as a result, our youth are failing as well.  The "dumbing down" of America is a real and tragic condition.

In response to your second #1.
its the culture and parents that treat teaching as a babysitting job. An example would be this time last year we had teacher walkouts in a state that’s ranked among the worst in teacher pay. The letters to the editor in the local paper were laughable. Parents complained mostly about having to find childcare and couldn’t care less about the outdated buildings and teacher pay they were fighting for. Parents expect teachers to parent their kids more than teach.
in terms of training, there’s a ton of training. Every few years the state requires more professional development, more certificates, more everything (that it almost always paid for out of pocket by the teacher). For example Colorado just passed a law (I don’t know if it’s law, a bill, or whatever) that teachers must obtain 3 college credits or 45 hours training in teaching language learners when they renew. I’m going to wind up paying about $500 just to meet that one requirement with training I have to pay for on my own time and dime. Most new teachers come into the profession with a MA in education, but yet get average pay below what most college grads get. A teacher with a master’s and 10 years of experience will make about 50k in my city. Less education or less experience will be less. It’s nearly impossible to support a family on 50k here. 
Teachers get treated less and less like a profession and more like baby sitters or community service. But that’s on recent culture, not the teachers. 

Wow- looks like continuing education requirements for teachers has gone up since I was teaching.  I have no doubt that extra financial burden is a drag for you folks.   That should come as part of you contract, not out of your pocket.

Yeah, I'm really bummed to hear how poorly teachers are paid and viewed today.  That's a shameful aspect of our culture. 

Here in NY the teachers won't get hired if they don't have ESL and or Special Education training.  

When we were in school certain kids would be brought out of class for 1 on 1 training for things, for the most part that doesn't happen anymore.