"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
news:1r29juoo3gemu6n3mptr3k0iu79hnhs0b5 at 4ax.com...
> "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
> >news:bs88jusrrcsdpsd0akq414c1ba0ui3q7sb at 4ax.com...> >> "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >The SATs are not well constructed. Generally, guessing penalties
don't
> >> >work, and there are numerous reasons for this. Firstly, guessing
penalties
> >> >rely on a completely random selection, which is rarely the case.
> >>
> >> Any improvement you can make on random selection reflects some sort of
> >> knowledge or logic.
> >
> >Yes. But not necessarily good knowledge.
>> There is such a thing as bad knowledge, if it leads to the correct answer?
I was agreeing that knowledge can help, but I was stating that incorrect
knowledge can hinder. It is 'bad'.
> >Note, for the translation question I would have simply written the
answer.
> >The question is quite trivial, and simple arithmetic should never have to
be
> >shown.
>> Yet large numbers of students got it wrong. If you put down the correct
> number with no work on that one, you may have gotten full credit. But if
you
> made an arithmetic mistake, you got no credit. Since the question was not
an
> arithmetic question, I would hate to have my success on the question
judged
> by the correctness of my mental arithmetic.
Actually, it was an arithmetic question. Nothing more than simple addition
and subtraction.
It didn't even have fractions. Definitely of the elementary school level.
> >> Not in mathematics and science, which is culture-free (in theory). But
see
> >> the answers and codings above.
> >
> >Science is not culture free. The questions use metric for one, which as
far
> >as I know is not taught in the US.
>> Of course it is. Science education in the US *ONLY* uses metric these
days.
> Furthermore, metric IS fundamental to the international standards of
science.
> If you don't know metric, you don't know science.
Oh, you use it now? It's about time. Regardless, science isn't actually
dependent on metric. The units of measure are quite arbitrary.
> >> If they get the wrong answer and don't show their work, then they were
> >> falsely overconfident.
> >
> >Not if the mistake is in work that they do show.
>> If that is the case then it can be seen.
Do they get marks for work with no correct answer? I was under the
impression they did not.
> >> More importantly, to the extent that memorization is required, it is
required
> >> equally of all kids, so this does not invalidate the international
> >> comparison. Cultural differences may affect the scores, but that is
> >> precisely the sort of thing that TIMSS was intended to detect - is that
> >> something about American (or whatever) culture or education that aids
or
> >> harms ability to solve the problems.
> >>
> >> We came up short, but the nincompoop's explanations have nothing to do
with
> >> the problem.
> >
> >The problem is that memorization does not necessarily correlate with
> >intelligence.
>> So? Neither TIMSS nor the SAT purport to be intelligence tests. The
> nincompoop seems to think they are, if it can be said that the nincompoop
> "thinks" at all.
I'll take it your not in agreement with him for that point.
