All Things RB Jeffrey Jones Thread

Donate To GopherHole


Standardized tests are not going anywhere because it is the only objective yardstick there is to compare students. The SAT correlates well with IQ for example.

Like others have said GPA can reflect effort, or it can reflect an easy or difficult course load or a lenient or stringent school or instructor(s).

In regards to test anxiety etc, I don't really buy into that. In the "real world" of professionals there are high stress situations every day. If you don't have the makeup to deal with anxiety, then you probably shouldn't attempt to enter many professions. Sorry. It's just another way to weed people out. Standardized testing doesn't tell the whole story but it tells part of the story.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Standardized tests are not going anywhere because it is the only objective yardstick there is to compare students. The SAT correlates well with IQ for example.

Like others have said GPA can reflect effort, or it can reflect an easy or difficult course load or a lenient or stringent school or instructor(s).

In regards to test anxiety etc, I don't really buy into that. In the "real world" of professionals there are high stress situations every day. If you don't have the makeup to deal with anxiety, then you probably shouldn't attempt to enter many professions. Sorry. It's just another way to weed people out. Standardized testing doesn't tell the whole story but it tells part of the story.
Click to expand...
I agree somewhat. To me it also depends on what you want to go to school for, and where you want to go to school. Obviously if you want to be a nurse or doctor etc. then you need to have higher test scores. If your just an average kid who gets a 17 on his ACT and wants to be a teacher, coach, or something else, and he has an overall pretty good GPA it shows he is still willing to try
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Standardized tests are not going anywhere because it is the only objective yardstick there is to compare students. The SAT correlates well with IQ for example.

Like others have said GPA can reflect effort, or it can reflect an easy or difficult course load or a lenient or stringent school or instructor(s).

In regards to test anxiety etc, I don't really buy into that. In the "real world" of professionals there are high stress situations every day. If you don't have the makeup to deal with anxiety, then you probably shouldn't attempt to enter many professions. Sorry. It's just another way to weed people out. Standardized testing doesn't tell the whole story but it tells part of the story.
Click to expand...

Schools are getting away from mandatory college entrance exams because they are largely biased and a poor indicator of performance in college.
 


Gopherguy0723 said:
Schools are getting away from mandatory college entrance exams because they are largely biased and a poor indicator of performance in college.
Click to expand...

Tests like ACT and SAT? My kid is a junior in high school and I see no sign of this. If so, what are you basing this statement on? Not saying you are incorrect, just curious.
 

Gopherfan12 said:
ACT is overrated. They need to look at the GPA more. So what if a kid gets 27 doesn't mean he is going to work hard. Kid from my high school got a 28 last year and has already dropped out of college. It's all about how hard you're willing to work. Now if a kid gets like a 14 or 15 that's different, but a 16 or 17 with a good GPA should be enough.
Click to expand...

gpa is pretty overrated as well. i have heard people lament over Cs, but a C has generally meant average in regards to grading scales. i would guess that grade inflation is as rampant in high school as it is in college.
 

so what's the deal with this thread? did jones not qualify (so that i don't have to go searching through 26 pages)?

edit: oops, 83 pages.
 

bigtenchamps1899 said:
so what's the deal with this thread? did jones not qualify (so that i don't have to go searching through 26 pages)?

edit: oops, 83 pages.
Click to expand...

No one knows. Just that he's taking it again in April

Then the debate was he should be studying 24/7 vs not a practice.....how easy it should be to get a passing score vs learning disabilities/upbringing/socioeconomic stuff....standardized test scores have no merit vs gpa vs work ethic....

Think you're caught up
 



Gopherguy0723 said:
Schools are getting away from mandatory college entrance exams because they are largely biased and a poor indicator of performance in college.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get into the racial bias stuff. Poor parental upbringing is tragic but doesn't really address the questions of whether someone can perform the mathematics, reading comprehension, and induction/deduction necessary to function in western society. I can understand some liberal arts schools going that way though. Liberal arts are one thing but regarding "hard" sciences, math, engineering, or law...these things matter.

Do you want your pilot to pass his testing (and the plane mechanic for that matter)? The plane's engineers? Your surgeon? Your accountant? The hospital pharmacist preparing your wife's IV (and the nurse administering it)? Are you comfortable giving them a pass on needing to pass standardized testing? They had a tough upbringing so they shouldn't be held to a high standard?
 

bigtenchamps1899 said:
gpa is pretty overrated as well. i have heard people lament over Cs, but a C has generally meant average in regards to grading scales. i would guess that grade inflation is as rampant in high school as it is in college.
Click to expand...

C's get degrees.
 

Schools have standardized testing to compare students from different schools period. Research has shown that they don't test aptitude (the A in SAT used to stand for aptitude until it was shown that it didn't predict it). I don't want an idiot doing brain surgery on my brain however, I don't care what their SAT score was. Every year more and more schools are becoming "test optional" meaning you can submit them or not. SAT scores are not good predictors of success relative to other things. Grades in high school are a much better predictor as is self-control, tenacity, grit, discipline and the like. Jones has many of those as can be shown in his success on the football field, if he can learn how to apply those characteristics to the classroom…then college will be a great place for him.
 

Can we start an "All Things Standardized Testing and Other Socioeconomic Indicators For Higher Learning Success Thread"?
 




Good luck to Mr. Jones on his ACT test. I hope he does well. That's all that really needs to be said.
 

Gopherwatcher said:
Good luck to Mr. Jones on his ACT test. I hope he does well. That's all that really needs to be said.
Click to expand...

I heard about this one guy who took the ACT totally hammered and he got a 26 or something like that. JJ should be fine.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
I'm not going to get into the racial bias stuff. Poor parental upbringing is tragic but doesn't really address the questions of whether someone can perform the mathematics, reading comprehension, and induction/deduction necessary to function in western society. I can understand some liberal arts schools going that way though. Liberal arts are one thing but regarding "hard" sciences, math, engineering, or law...these things matter.

Do you want your pilot to pass his testing (and the plane mechanic for that matter)? The plane's engineers? Your surgeon? Your accountant? The hospital pharmacist preparing your wife's IV (and the nurse administering it)? Are you comfortable giving them a pass on needing to pass standardized testing? They had a tough upbringing so they shouldn't be held to a high standard?
Click to expand...

You made the fatal error of conflation. The ACT and SAT supposedly measure collegiate performance not career performance.

ACT and SAT scores at 17 and 18 cannot tell you how well someone delivers an IV at age 28.
 

No, the argument is whether testing measures anything of value; whether it's the act, sat, mcat, bar, nclex etc, etc, etc. They are valuable tools for measuring competence for entrance into college programs or career fields. And they do correlate with future performance and income. Whomever said they don't is simply wrong.

Like I said, they aren't the only thing that most colleges look at. It's the bare minimum for competence. Other colleges are free to use criteria they feel are more equitable for their applicant base.

Many, perhaps most wealthy or successful people did not score extremely high on the sat or act. Attributes like personality, communication skills, ambition trump all in many lucrative fields. Look no further than coach Kill.

I think we're talking past each other. Luckily, the people that matter in these fields will continue to evaluate candidates on the attributes important in that field. What's important for admission to college A may not be necessary at College B.

As you're probably aware many schools do not standardized tests for admission primarily due to affirmative action concerns and many use neither grades or testing for some rather touchy feely educational philosophical reasons.

If the NCAA blows up bard college is going to have a hell of a football team!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marjo...-everything_b_1774345.html?utm_hp_ref=college
 

I'm going to cede victory. I'm tired of arguing about this.

Lets get back to the thread, and I apologize to everyone for taking part in the hijack.

Someone get Jeff Jones a tutor. He can do it if he really wants to.
 



I'm not panicking. I fully understand the JJ is borderline, I see retaking the ACT and talking to the coaches, as his doing everything he can to to ensure that he does qualify. Who else would you go to for advise on getting through the NCAA Clearing House? Assuming that he passed the ACT in February, the score still could be low enough that the required GPA at that score, isn't a sure thing. A point or two higher on the ACT just might make a difference. We all know that raising GPA is more difficult than raising a test score, so retaking the test, makes sense.
 


mcal24 said:
I think a monkey can get a 15 on the ACT
Click to expand...

I thought I heard that if you picked the same answer for every question you'd get like an 11 or something. I took the test like 6 years ago so I could be making that up.
 

Focus is a major issue. It's not easy to sit and test for several hours straight. Some people have more trouble than others. Really.....the ACT is just a general knowledge test. Not exactly something you can adequately study for.
 

I once took the ACT.
That's all. Seemed as relevant as most of the posts on this JJ thread the past few days.
 

If you have any concept of the English language or how to speak, and payed attention at all in geometry and algebra, you should be able to get in the 20s on English in Math. Reading is quite difficult IMO, as anyone who isn't a super-speedy reader finds themselves pressed on time to complete the section. Science is also very confusing, but just making educated guesses and plucking data off graphs can get you into the low 20s.

Bottom line, non-learning disabled students who payed attention at all during school should be able to get a 19-20. I've known some pretty dumb kids who have hit 20s on their composites. I'm confident Jeff can get a qualifying score.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom