Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the most part, SES is tied to parents cognitive ability, and smart people generally have smart kids.

Good read related to this talking about research using the NLSY dataset.

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2015/04/income-weath-and-iq.html

And one about IQ and SES by examining children within the same family (obviously controls for SES)

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/03/ses-and-iq.html

Yes, and for the most part, the moon is made of green cheese.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if my kid wants to be an astronaut and NASA doesn't select him...we should end space travel?

Obviously. If your kid doesn't get selected then the process is clearly biased and unfair.

Anonymous wrote:

For the most part, SES is tied to parents cognitive ability, and smart people generally have smart kids.

Good read related to this talking about research using the NLSY dataset.

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2015/04/income-weath-and-iq.html

And one about IQ and SES by examining children within the same family (obviously controls for SES)

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/03/ses-and-iq.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn't MCPS find a test where minority black and Hispanic children score higher or equal Asian and white kids. Search for an equitable test. All those claiming iq and sat tests are biased, where is the test biased the other way.

For the most part cognitive ability is tied to the parents' SES, not race, because it can be influenced by how much enrichment, verbal interaction, and so forth is provided at home. It can even be influenced by the mom's diet when pregnant, and as simple as the parents just simply stressing the importance of education, thereby, the kid will "study" more.

Some of it is innate, but mostly, it is influenced by external factors.

For the most part, SES is tied to parents cognitive ability, and smart people generally have smart kids.

Good read related to this talking about research using the NLSY dataset.

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2015/04/income-weath-and-iq.html

And one about IQ and SES by examining children within the same family (obviously controls for SES)

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/03/ses-and-iq.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn't MCPS find a test where minority black and Hispanic children score higher or equal Asian and white kids. Search for an equitable test. All those claiming iq and sat tests are biased, where is the test biased the other way.

For the most part cognitive ability is tied to the parents' SES, not race, because it can be influenced by how much enrichment, verbal interaction, and so forth is provided at home. It can even be influenced by the mom's diet when pregnant, and as simple as the parents just simply stressing the importance of education, thereby, the kid will "study" more.

Some of it is innate, but mostly, it is influenced by external factors.

Anonymous wrote:
Not really. They have tied funding to some testing, but there is no such federal law that mandates standardized testing.

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn't MCPS find a test where minority black and Hispanic children score higher or equal Asian and white kids. Search for an equitable test. All those claiming iq and sat tests are biased, where is the test biased the other way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS can make the arguement that testing is not useful and equitable, maybe it can eventually weasel out of other tests too - like the dreaded PARCC and MAP. No testing, no accountability.

But MCPS is actually not making this argument.

Also, the PARCC test (which is dreaded by whom?) or its equivalent is required by federal law.

PARCC is *NOT* required by federal law. F

ooop hit enter too soon.... For MCPS, PARCC replaced the MSA, which, again, was not a requirement by federal law.

Federal law requires a test. Not specifically PARCC, not specifically the MSA -- but a test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS can make the arguement that testing is not useful and equitable, maybe it can eventually weasel out of other tests too - like the dreaded PARCC and MAP. No testing, no accountability.

But MCPS is actually not making this argument.

Also, the PARCC test (which is dreaded by whom?) or its equivalent is required by federal law.

PARCC is *NOT* required by federal law. F

ooop hit enter too soon.... For MCPS, PARCC replaced the MSA, which, again, was not a requirement by federal law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS can make the arguement that testing is not useful and equitable, maybe it can eventually weasel out of other tests too - like the dreaded PARCC and MAP. No testing, no accountability.

But MCPS is actually not making this argument.

Also, the PARCC test (which is dreaded by whom?) or its equivalent is required by federal law.

PARCC is *NOT* required by federal law. F

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS can make the arguement that testing is not useful and equitable, maybe it can eventually weasel out of other tests too - like the dreaded PARCC and MAP. No testing, no accountability.

But MCPS is actually not making this argument.

Also, the PARCC test (which is dreaded by whom?) or its equivalent is required by federal law.

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS can make the arguement that testing is not useful and equitable, maybe it can eventually weasel out of other tests too - like the dreaded PARCC and MAP. No testing, no accountability.

Anonymous wrote:

Only if he is URM.