Explain how standardized tests are biased

Paul2432 wrote:

The best measure of whether the test is biased is whether it accurately predicts future academic success. The data shows that it does not.

Ok, so take male/female. Men tend to outperform women on tests, but women generally outperform men in the classroom. One way to look at this is to say the tests aren't measuring real ability. But another way (and one that I think is probably more valid) is looking at why men underperform vs their actual ability in a classroom setting.

Likely the problem is behavioral (men have worse study habits, current classwork tends to be more collaborative which women are often better at, etc.), but an SJW in an alternate scenario would likely say that could be explained by anti-male bias in classroom expectations or some such nonsense.

Luv2Run wrote:

One example of a biased question was in NC when they first rolled out the test to graduate from HS. The essay question was something like "Describe one change you would make to your lunch room". A problem was that some schools in Wilmington on the beach did not have any lunchrooms. The weather was so nice they ate outside at picnic tables. They had no lunch room.

Any kid who's not a complete dunce should have been able to navigate this one.

Math genius wrote:

Paul2432 wrote:

The best measure of whether the test is biased is whether it accurately predicts future academic success. The data shows that it does not.

Ok, so take male/female. Men tend to outperform women on tests, but women generally outperform men in the classroom. One way to look at this is to say the tests aren't measuring real ability. But another way (and one that I think is probably more valid) is looking at why men underperform vs their actual ability in a classroom setting.

Likely the problem is behavioral (men have worse study habits, current classwork tends to be more collaborative which women are often better at, etc.), but an SJW in an alternate scenario would likely say that could be explained by anti-male bias in classroom expectations or some such nonsense.

Females are natural people pleasers, so they work harder in school. But that extra work still doesn't make up for their inferiority in math. Testosterone strengthens math/systemic thinking, and estrogen strengthens people-pleasing.

Female CEO Tells Truth about feminist women in tech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzmQVejR6a8

your parents wrote:

Banjo wrote:

I didn't say that, I said people with a 75 IQ shouldn't be able to vote. Same goes for a 79 IQ, and there's a strong argument against allowing 83 IQs to vote as well.

Why not?

I have an adult (white) brother that can barely read. He struggles to read a menu. However, he's practically a genius in areas that are undervalued by the Eurocentric values used to define intelligence etc. etc.

...

...

Just kidding! No, please believe me....he is DUMB AF. Like, really criminally dumb.

Math genius wrote:

your parents wrote:

Why not?

I have an adult (white) brother that can barely read. He struggles to read a menu. However, he's practically a genius in areas that are undervalued by the Eurocentric values used to define intelligence etc. etc.

...

...

Just kidding! No, please believe me....he is DUMB AF. Like, really criminally dumb.

Cool story - you sound like a great brother. Why should he be denied an essential American right?

your parents wrote:

Math genius wrote:

I have an adult (white) brother that can barely read. He struggles to read a menu. However, he's practically a genius in areas that are undervalued by the Eurocentric values used to define intelligence etc. etc.

...

...

Just kidding! No, please believe me....he is DUMB AF. Like, really criminally dumb.

Cool story - you sound like a great brother. Why should he be denied an essential American right?

Oh, I think he should be allowed to vote, I never said otherwise. He'd probably vote for Insane Clown Posse for president or something.

Seriously though, all joking aside, he's a complete imbecile and a danger to society.

Untrue. Men outperform women in college in math and science and anything that has objective grading criteria.

Banjo wrote:

Math genius wrote:

Ok, so take male/female. Men tend to outperform women on tests, but women generally outperform men in the classroom. One way to look at this is to say the tests aren't measuring real ability. But another way (and one that I think is probably more valid) is looking at why men underperform vs their actual ability in a classroom setting.

Likely the problem is behavioral (men have worse study habits, current classwork tends to be more collaborative which women are often better at, etc.), but an SJW in an alternate scenario would likely say that could be explained by anti-male bias in classroom expectations or some such nonsense.

Females are natural people pleasers, so they work harder in school. But that extra work still doesn't make up for their inferiority in math. Testosterone strengthens math/systemic thinking, and estrogen strengthens people-pleasing.

My god Mod's please delete this thread. I posted on here earlier (As a person who is well versed in this subject) and it appears that my post was deleted when I called out Banjo here for being anti-semetic after he called me a "dirty jew" and posted some strange picture of a stereotypical Jew to go along with it.

As I said earlier Banjo and I'll be more politically correct. You have no clue what you are talking about. You unfortunelty are lost in some odd white supremacist circular rant you put together with an odd set of video's and web links.

While Rojo did post some stuff from James Flynn (who was well respected in the cognitive fields). This talk about "standardized test" which again is a very very broad term that does not directly refers to a IQ test is way off topic. Heck a drivers test is a standardized test. An eye test is a standardized test.

A standardized test is any form of test that (1) requires all test takers to answer the same questions, or a selection of questions from common bank of questions, in the same way, and that (2) is scored in a “standard” or consistent manner, which makes it possible to compare the relative performance of individual. A million different test fall under this meaning.

So again Banjo you said people need to be told when they are dumb and that we can't hide it from them so. This will probably get deleted but again it as my expert opinion that based on the evidence you have presented with me today that you are in fact a very Stupid individual. Very Very Stupid to be more concrete. So I just want you to know that because you said that's what we should do when feel that we have encountered a cognitively inferior person in our lives.

Wells Fargo CEO apologizes for blaming lack of diversity on "limited pool of Black talent"

Wells Fargo CEO Charles Scharf apologized in a company-wide memo on Wednesday for twice blaming the bank's lack of employee diversity on a "very limited pool of Black talent."

Scharf called his earlier statements, which he made in an email to workers in mid-June and then repeated on an employee Zoom call this summer, "insensitive" and a reflection of his "own unconscious bias." The memo, which Wells released Wednesday, also highlighted a number of Black executives who had been hired or recently promoted, as well as a list of efforts the company has taken to "improve diversity."

Come on Banjo, tell me why individuals with an IQ of 80 should be denied essential American rights.

Banjo give you brain a break. You do not understand all of these numbers. Go back to TheDonald or wherever you low IQ people go. I am worried about mental bandwidth. You might have overdone it today will of these big numbers and large words.

My god Mod's please delete this thread.

...

This will probably get deleted but again it as my expert opinion that based on the evidence you have presented with me today that you are in fact a very Stupid individual

your parents wrote:

Come on Banjo, tell me why individuals with an IQ of 80 should be denied essential American rights.

"essential American right".

I think the Founding Fathers had it correct, and I myself would not even be able to vote under their "essential American" voting rights laws. Originally only land-owning men could vote. I don't own land. But the US would be in infinitely better shape than we are now with voting rights for everybody who can sign an "x" for their signature.

Banjo wrote:

My god Mod's please delete this thread.

...

This will probably get deleted but again it as my expert opinion that based on the evidence you have presented with me today that you are in fact a very Stupid individual

https://img.4plebs.org/boards/x/image/1369/90/1369909584495.jpg

It's never to late to get help Banjo. Learning can be hard. I know your scared of all these big words and numbers and feel real overwhelmed. So like I said give your brain a break for today. It's my expert opinion that you wore it out already. Go take a long nap and old Tucker will be on the TV before you know it.

You shouldn’t need to have X IQ to have a voice in your government. That’s un-American. That’s why you don’t have to be a land-owning white male anymore.

your parents wrote:

You shouldn’t need to have X IQ to have a voice in your government. That’s un-American. That’s why you don’t have to be a land-owning white male anymore.

We ban toddlers from voting, because they are mental midgets.

I'm adding you to the list of undesirables.

ActualPsychologist wrote:

Banjo wrote:

https://img.4plebs.org/boards/x/image/1369/90/1369909584495.jpg

It's never to late to get help Banjo. Learning can be hard. I know your scared of all these big words and numbers and feel real overwhelmed. So like I said give your brain a break for today. It's my expert opinion that you wore it out already. Go take a long nap and old Tucker will be on the TV before you know it.

I finally realized you're not a psychiatrist, you're just familiar enough with them that you figured you could pull off an impersonation. Way too many basic spelling and grammatical errors.

You tried your best though.

Kids (and Animals) Who Fail Classic Mirror Tests May Still Have Sense of Self

Flaws in a long-accepted test used to search for signs of self-awareness are revealing that selfhood varies culturally and exists on a continuum

Since the 1970s psychologists have used mirrors to search for signs of self-awareness in both humans and animals. Along the way, they came to believe that humans were almost universally able to pass a mirror-based self-recognition test by 24 months of age. But a 2004 study published in Child Development called that idea into question. Researchers found the widely accepted finding only applied to kids from Western nations, where most of the previous studies had been done. Now, a study published September 9 in The Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology is reinforcing that idea and taking it further. Not only do non-Western kids fail to pass the mirror self-recognition test by 24 months—in some countries, they still are not succeeding at six years old.

...

But when Broesch tried the mark mirror test outside the U.S. and Canada, she got some strange results. In Kenya, for instance, only two out of 82 children, some as old as six, passed. But the kids who did not pass were not psychologically damaged or lacking empathy. And most displayed what Broesch calls "freezing" behavior—the children did not greet or smile at their reflection. Instead, they stood still and seemed deeply uncomfortable.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kids-and-animals-who-fail-classic-mirror/