I wouldn't take this quite as seriously as one ordinarily might, since the sourcing is not known.
There's one huge problem with trying to weight scores from state to state, and another in creating a reasonable conversion from ACT to SAT.
For example, in a 2009 compilation, New Mexico rated many places higher than Massachusetts, even though the per pupil spending and college attendance of Massachusetts graduates is quite a bit higher. The reason for that ranking? New Mexico's test participation rate was 11%, while Massachusetts' was 85%. The higher the participation rate, the closer to the national average the state scores, and the true measure of departure from the national average becomes a matter of a couple of handfuls of points.
Comparing the two different tests so that they can be averaged is difficult, too. The ACT has a general knowledge component built into the questions, while the SAT depends more heavily on the logical application of grammatical and mathematical rules. And, again, participation rates in the two tests vary widely from state to state, and reasonable comparisons become difficult unless one can get a large enough sample of students in each state that take both tests, and use that sample as the basis for comparison and conversion. Again, not easy to do because of statistically significant differences in participation. High participation in the ACT and low participation in the SAT would create a low probability of accuracy in converting scores, for example.
Though the indicated trend may well be true, I certainly wouldn't use the cited source as primary evidence.
It's from a 1999 "compilation" without any methodology documentation, whose main page includes the query "Worried that a move might bring you next door to an apathetic, illiterate, tobacco-chewing, cockfight-watching, snakehandling, gonorrhea-carrying axe murderer?"
Not a particularly objective or reliable sounding study approach.
Problem is, it agrees with a lot of research done in actual refereed journals, such as this ERIC paper. All that the opponents of unions have managed to do is sputter, "yes, yes, kids perform better in union states, but it costs too much!". Money is more important than kids? Thanks for letting us know your priorities, righties!
To Montag's point (that states with higher participation would be expected to have results closer the the national mean): all of these states (except VA) are in the lower quartile. From this perspective, I infer that, allowing for a predicted mean, they're still underperforming.
Conservative research think tanks have conclusively proved that tax cuts, in combination with mandatory prayer, mandatory firearms and complete elimination of abortion rights, unions and the minimum wage will actually improve education, reduce crime, eliminate poverty and global warming, and generally make the USA NUMBER ONE!!!!
My own personal think research tanked when i seen o&a enter the fray with his exhibitionism of all those assertions. Yeah, I said "when I seen." I can get your agreement with any damn proof I wish to assert with up a loaded gun at the side of your head. Eliminating your conservative thimk tanks would do a lot to improve the minds of children instead of the mindsets of cloned rich rightwingers and suckups to their ilk. vox
Rising Hegemon
12 comments:
I wouldn't take this quite as seriously as one ordinarily might, since the sourcing is not known.
There's one huge problem with trying to weight scores from state to state, and another in creating a reasonable conversion from ACT to SAT.
For example, in a 2009 compilation, New Mexico rated many places higher than Massachusetts, even though the per pupil spending and college attendance of Massachusetts graduates is quite a bit higher. The reason for that ranking? New Mexico's test participation rate was 11%, while Massachusetts' was 85%. The higher the participation rate, the closer to the national average the state scores, and the true measure of departure from the national average becomes a matter of a couple of handfuls of points.
Comparing the two different tests so that they can be averaged is difficult, too. The ACT has a general knowledge component built into the questions, while the SAT depends more heavily on the logical application of grammatical and mathematical rules. And, again, participation rates in the two tests vary widely from state to state, and reasonable comparisons become difficult unless one can get a large enough sample of students in each state that take both tests, and use that sample as the basis for comparison and conversion. Again, not easy to do because of statistically significant differences in participation. High participation in the ACT and low participation in the SAT would create a low probability of accuracy in converting scores, for example.
Though the indicated trend may well be true, I certainly wouldn't use the cited source as primary evidence.
It's from a 1999 "compilation" without any methodology documentation, whose main page includes the query "Worried that a move might bring you next door to an apathetic, illiterate, tobacco-chewing, cockfight-watching, snakehandling, gonorrhea-carrying axe murderer?"
Not a particularly objective or reliable sounding study approach.
Seems like www.wolframalpha.com might be of assistance here.
Problem is, it agrees with a lot of research done in actual refereed journals, such as this ERIC paper. All that the opponents of unions have managed to do is sputter, "yes, yes, kids perform better in union states, but it costs too much!". Money is more important than kids? Thanks for letting us know your priorities, righties!
- Badtux the Snarky Penguin
keeping kids stoopid is to perpetuate republikkklan voters.
I agree with Montag's analysis. I also wondered about the source of the data and found it from 1999. The more recent data still supports the premise:
South Carolina - 48th
North Carolina - 39th
Georgia - 47th
Texas - 45th
Virginia - 33rd
Wisconsin is ranked #2 in the nation.
http://blog.bestandworststates.com/2009/08/25/state-sat-scores-2009.aspx
To Montag's point (that states with higher participation would be expected to have results closer the the national mean): all of these states (except VA) are in the lower quartile. From this perspective, I infer that, allowing for a predicted mean, they're still underperforming.
Conservative research think tanks have conclusively proved that tax cuts, in combination with mandatory prayer, mandatory firearms and complete elimination of abortion rights, unions and the minimum wage will actually improve education, reduce crime, eliminate poverty and global warming, and generally make the USA NUMBER ONE!!!!
Moammar Khadafy hearts Governor Scott "I Will Dictate The Way It Is, You Do It" Walker. Resume's on it's way.
My own personal think research tanked when i seen o&a enter the fray with his exhibitionism of all those assertions. Yeah, I said "when I seen."
I can get your agreement with any damn proof I wish to assert with up a loaded gun at the side of your head.
Eliminating your conservative thimk tanks would do a lot to improve the minds of children instead of the mindsets of cloned rich rightwingers and suckups to their ilk. vox
In fairness, Governor Walker is not trying to make Wisconsin part of the South, he is trying to make it Ghana.
Wisconsin Update: Ranking State SAT/ACT Statistics By Teacher Union Laws
They said the south would rise again -- and this time it wants to take all of us with it...
Post a Comment