<p>nightchef:</p>
<p>First, correlation is not the same thing as causation, of course. These are complicated issues. </p>
<p>However, I must say you are a little all over the map on this. First, you want to call the researchers’ independance into question, which I understand, but since no one has disputed it, or their data you jump to a red herring (i.e. they “should’ve studied the high school’s policies”). (As if that would tell us anything, since they already compared AP and non-AP kids and compared “like” students, both academically and demographically.)</p>
<p>Now you are taking a new turn, seeing that it would be almost impossible (and pointless) for them to factor in the policies of all the high schools involved you now say they should “design a study” in which they compare like students “before taking the classes”. Should we all hold our breath until this magical study comes out before we follow the data that’s currently out there, the presently discussed study not included? Based on your responses, it appears that if the study you want done came to conclusions that don’t back up the way you already feel, you will throw new caveats at it? </p>
<p>Certainly, as I mentioned, these are complex matters and the aforementioned study is not the final word. I must say, however, that I just don’t understand the mindset that sees allowing students the opportunity to challenge themselves as a bad thing? I hate to quote George W. Bush, but he referred to it as “The soft bigotry of low expectations.” </p>
<p>I’d be happy for you to show me a study that shows that allowing college-bound kids to take an AP course has a deliterious effect on their college outcomes. Until then, I’m going to come down on the side of advocating for opportunities for kids.</p>