Is UT=Ivy of Texas?

navyarf
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:34:29 +0000

First of all to address all the people who wish to attack my character, I will for now on call special education individuals “■■■■■■■■”. They are ■■■■■■■■. ■■■■■■■■. Get it?

As for what I am like in real life, I am above all, honest. I am NOT nice. I tell the truth, even when the truth hurts. This is the nature of integrity. Having “integrity” does not mean one is nice.

Mimimomx3, I hope you are not a lawyer. If you were my public defender, I would commit suicide. Your argumentation skills are pathetic. First of all, you imply that I consider soft majors and classes to be “useless”. In my previous post, I made the point that they were of less social utility in comparison with quantitatively oriented majors and classes.

Furthermore, you respond to jr1038 with a link to fairtest. I don’t know what exactly you are getting at, but it seems to me(correct me if I am wrong) that you think the SAT is meaningless. Jr1038 was not making the point that SAT is a perfect test. It is not. But it is the best method we have for evaluating college readiness. The SAT has plenty of flaws.

But “bias” is not one of them. I read through the list of summaries you provided and laughed. Some of these conclusions are hilarious. The SAT is biased against girls. The SAT is biased against NAMs. Perhaps, the SAT favors SMART PEOPLE. Obviously, it is biased against STUPID PEOPLE. It is supposed to be. Is it too much to ask that you consider the possibility that boys might be better at math than girls? Or that whites and Asians might be smarter (on average) than NAMs?

The SAT is not perfect. But evaluating by SAT is much fairer than evaluating by “class rank”.

I’m pretty scared that “right brainers” will rule the future because many of them will also be “left wingers”. Right brain+left ideology= :X(.