Weirder, More random, More Interesting.

[Guard Dog]

19 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

I assume you are talking about the writer of the article, because he seems to be finding 'political correctness' everywhere. 

As is pointed out with the historical references, this isn't a new trend. Every generation tends to be aghast at certain aspects of the previous. Sometimes it's justified, sometimes it isn't. Thankfully people tend to jump to the defense of those who deserve it, as we see with Mark Twain. But sometimes we lose an entire civilization worth of work, like when Diego de Landa burned the works of the Mayans. I just have a hard time getting worked up over the idea that The Cosby Show is harder to find now. It's a small thing. I think it's a rather big step from outrage to elimination, actually.  

No actually the notion of banning is my own angst slipping in. I don't think the article mentioned it. When it comes to governmental bodies deciding "Thou shalt not read/watch/listen" it is rarer now than it has been in the past. No less insidious though. When it is done it is done from the same perverse sense of superior "morality" that got Salinger, Fitzgerald, Twain, and Joyce banned in the 50's & 60's. Only now the banned books are usually non-fiction and the bans are politically motivated. I remember before I left South Florida there was a big to do about the Broward County school board ordering a book removed from schools because it was about Cuban Refugees and painted Cuba in an "unflattering light". 

Now when I say "banning" obviously I'm talking about removing them from schools. No government in the US can "ban" anything (Thank God & James Madison). 

The kind of banning I was referring to was more of a "soft" ban when platforms like Youtube and Hulu refuse to host content for political reasons. Of course, that is their bandwidth, their sand box. They can show or not show what ever they like for whatever reason or no reason.  Not that I think they should though. You know my take: nothing should ever be restricted from anyone. If I ever come into the possession of unlimited data storage and unlimited BW to access it and the rights to everything for all time I'd let any one watch/listen/read all of it. Something to look forward to right? 

 

You'll appreciate this one. I remember when I was in high school (or maybe middle school not sure) there was a big deal about certain school districts in Florida banning 1984 because it was "pro-communist". Before asking for a book to be banned maybe they should actually READ it first!

[Malcador]

https://www.pcmag.com/news/368388/internet-meme-pioneer-ytmnd-shuts-down

 

[injurai]

22 minutes ago, Malcador said:

https://www.pcmag.com/news/368388/internet-meme-pioneer-ytmnd-shuts-down

 

RIP

[Gfted1]

SAT to use "Adversity Score".

Bwahahaha, delicious, but at least this program should include all races.

[injurai]

I doubt inter-generational student loan debt will be factored in as a form of "adversity."

[Gfted1]

The "15 factors" are behind the WSJ paywall but we can probably guess a couple that weren't already mentioned:

Minority

Household income

2 Parents

I mean really, its just affirmative action V2.0. Im sure if you tick the "minority", "no daddy" or "ate up with social anxieties" then you will shoot to the top of the list. BUT WAIT! That just gets you admitted! Since that student is already laboring under this unfair "adversities", there is no doubt they will not be able to finance their education either, so it will have to become a scholarship! Weve gone full circle but Im just glad everyone is included this time.  

[Gromnir]

am not certain how gifted read this as affirmative action. sat is gonna provide a number which the student never sees. the number will be sent to schools and the schools may then decide what, if anything, to do with the number.  the number, in and of itself, benefits the student not at all. 

'ccording to the article, yale, and other schools, is already applying an adversity score. yale is a private institution and decided they value a more diverse student body. if a vast majority o' your students is coming from same small group o' eastern prep schools, there is no doubt a tendency to develop a kinda echo chamber environment.  same backgrounds. same teachers. same curriculum. am understanding why folks in charge at yale might value greater diversity o' pov 'mongst their student body... and yale has the resources to develop their own adversity score as they see fit. schools not yale, schools with an endowment less than $25 billion (or whatever it is 2019) might see value in having an adversity score available w/o having the resources to develop such.

sat is doing no more than standardizing readily available info into an easy to understand (and no doubt oversimplified) number, which is their business after all. college boards thus offers a service to schools, no doubt to fill a perceived demand. gifted is 'gainst capitalism?

knee-jerk

HA! Good Fun!

 

Edited May 16, 2019 by Gromnir
referred to gifted as gd. such a scurrilous misidentification and misattribution demands an apology sincere and clear. am deeply mortified by our error and while am not deserving forgiveness, am hopeful time washes away the sin.

[Gfted1]

16 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

gifted is 'gainst capitalism?

You bet I am! Ive 100% embraced someone else financing my life, because I deserve it. 

Each school is going to have a different hardship meter? Lol, that makes it even better.  

[Gromnir]

9 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

You bet I am! Ive 100% embraced someone else financing my life, because I deserve it. 

Each school is going to have a different hardship meter? Lol, that makes it even better.  

...

am not certain what you thought were the point o' the adversity score. is a standardized numerical score sent to schools. not as if the sat people could force schools to adopt the score as part o' a universal admissions process. private schools and state school systems is gonna need decide what to do with the numbers sat provides, if anything.

HA! Good Fun!

[Gfted1]

If the SAT is standardized, and the QQ score is standardized, how is it not the same for all schools? Its not mandatory? Just more virtue signaling?

Can we circle back to someone paying off my mortgage or at least my kid college education?

[Gromnir]

2 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

If the SAT is standardized, and the QQ score is standardized, how is it not the same for all schools? Its not mandatory? Just more virtue signaling?

Can we circle back to someone paying off my mortgage or at least my kid college education?

ah, once again with the predictable qq shiboleth. predictable if disappointing. am seeing serious discussion is once again at it terminus. nevertheless, the adversity score is generated by SAT and not a school. score is on a scale o' 1-100.  college boards sends adversity score, along with sat test results, to schools designated by the student. sat doesn't have control over how individual schools or state school systems utilize their data as part o' the admissions process.

again, what exactly did you think were gonna happen? your confusion is actual more curious than the sat adversity score  issue which is pretty straight-forward.

as to getting somebody to pay for your kid's college, am suspecting you is gonna need vote bernie sanders. relevance to sat numbers is elusive.

HA! Good Fun!

[Amentep]

15 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

If the SAT is standardized, and the QQ score is standardized, how is it not the same for all schools? Its not mandatory? Just more virtue signaling?

The SAT is a standardized test.  Your test score is related to your answers on the test.

The "adversity score" is a 'further information' about the student that takes the 15 factors (whatever they are) and creates a score on those factors (presumably with handy graphs).  It is provided to institutions to give an impression of the student beyond the test score.  Institutions can use it or not.

Two things to note within this, one is that most schools are looking at multiple factors for enrollment now.  Take SAT, take HS GPA, take rigor of coursework taken, and take AP, IB or dual enrollment credit into consideration (and for highly selective schools, volunteer work, references, etc).  Theoretically this information - standardized by the SAT - could also be used in a multi-factor decision process.  Its entirely possible that some schools may have a local version already concocted from their own data about student success at their school.

The second is that current data shows that while SAT is a good measure of retention of information, retention of information is not always a good indicator of success at school.  For a traditional freshman, current data suggests that HS GPA (even considering grade inflation) is actually a better indicator of potential success in college (but even then, not perfect, hence the use of multiple factors).

Edited May 16, 2019 by Amentep
added some words for clarity

[Gfted1]

^All that other stuff already existed so if the QQ score is completely voluntary then this is nothing more than signaling. "Look at me! Im even MORE disadvantaged!" I should have known.

[Gromnir]

5 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

 I should have known.

agreed on this point. point o' the adversity score wasn't least unclear. were a knee-jerk reaction to ascribe some kinda import and value to sat's new number beyond which were readily apparent. am nevertheless relieved the ambiguity were dispelled even if the cause o' confusion remains elusive.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[injurai]

tmi

Edited May 16, 2019 by injurai

[Gfted1]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

agreed on this point. point o' the adversity score wasn't least unclear. were a knee-jerk reaction to ascribe some kinda import and value to sat's new number beyond which were readily apparent. am nevertheless relieved the ambiguity were dispelled even if the cause o' confusion remains elusive.

HA! Good Fun!

 

Because of statements contained in paragraphs; 1, 5 and 8.

Perhaps the WSJ states unequivocally that university participation is not mandatory?

[Gromnir]

41 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Because of statements contained in paragraphs; 1, 5 and 8.

Perhaps the WSJ states unequivocally that university participation is not mandatory?

so, asking us to prove a negative? regardless, is nothing in those paragraphs which suggests the use o' such numbers is mandatory.  by what mechanic would the sat folks be able to compel schools to utilize their new number? 

full article is available via msn if you are interested, but lord knows how you will get any closer to enlightenment. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

7 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

The "15 factors" are behind the WSJ paywall but we can probably guess a couple that weren't already mentioned:

Minority

Household income

2 Parents

I mean really, its just affirmative action V2.0. Im sure if you tick the "minority", "no daddy" or "ate up with social anxieties" then you will shoot to the top of the list. BUT WAIT! That just gets you admitted! Since that student is already laboring under this unfair "adversities", there is no doubt they will not be able to finance their education either, so it will have to become a scholarship! Weve gone full circle but Im just glad everyone is included this time.  

am risking the dreaded double-post, but is kinda worth it... is nevertheless on us as we forgot to mention an important detail. 'least the detail appeared important to gifted. in any event, underlined status from gifted post is not one o' the 15 factors in the sat's new adversity score.  

HA! Good Fun!

[Amentep]

Most schools that care will know race/ethnicity of the applicant before they ever receive SAT scores through their application anyhow. SAT providing information most colleges track already would be pointless.

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Amentep said:

Most schools that care will know race/ethnicity of the applicant before they ever receive SAT scores through their application anyhow. SAT providing information most colleges track already would be pointless.

no doubt. nevertheless, is possible some sensitive folks were, what is word, triggered by the fox news snippet and the "adversity score" language. 'could see how a few folks connected dots which didn't actual exist.

even so, adversity scores is gonna identify groups w/o needing in indulge in legal ambiguous exploration o' backgrounds. state universities stymied by Court efforts to make certain aspects o' a applicant's background more relevant in the admissions process  will be able to use adversity score as an alternative route to achieve similar end purposes.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Malcador]

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canada-ranks-second-in-the-world-for-cocaine-use-and-feeling-conflicted-about-it-report

The way people act in Toronto sure does make me think they're all on coke.

[Gfted1]

Lions and tigers and triggers, oh my! Hilariously, "QQ" is a clown whistle and 60% of the time it works every time.

[Raithe]

[rjshae]

On 5/16/2019 at 10:10 AM, Gfted1 said:

SAT to use "Adversity Score".

Bwahahaha, delicious, but at least this program should include all races.

Here I'm thinking, "Well good, now we have a useful metric to predict University graduation failure rate".

[ShadySands]

‘Playing Catch-Up in the Game of Life.’ Millennials Approach Middle Age in Crisis. New data show they’re in worse financial shape than every preceding living generation and may never recover

Quote

American millennials are approaching middle age in worse financial shape than every living generation ahead of them, lagging behind baby boomers and Generation X despite a decade of economic growth and falling unemployment.

Hobbled by the financial crisis and recession that struck as they began their working life, Americans born between 1981 and 1996 have failed to match every other generation of young adults born since the Great Depression. They have less wealth, less property, lower marriage rates and fewer children, according to new data that compare generations at similar ages.

Even with record levels of education, the troubles of millennials have delayed traditional adult milestones in ways expected to alter the nation’s demographic and economic contours through the end of the century.

I thought this would be interesting as we discussed something similar in PoE2 section a while back.

Also, Why Are Millennials Rejecting Prized Family Possessions? The experience economy is upending tradition

Quote

As a verb, “konmari”—the life-changing technique of decluttering, as proselytized by Marie Kondo—may well suffer the same fate as the adjective “metrosexual.” Go on, try to recall the last time someone dropped that into casual conversation. But as an idea, it may also enjoy the same future: silent ubiquity in our culture. After all, we live in a world where male grooming industry sales now rake in $50 billion annually. So what does a culture where konmari has been internalized look like?

According to senior citizens, it looks like a culture where nobody wants their stuff. For the past few years, there’s at least one article a year wherein downsizing baby boomers are shocked (shocked!) that their children and grandchildren do not want their generously-offered possessions.

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by ShadySands