Blacks and the SAT
How a Media Illusion is Spun
The Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) has long been a standard evaluation of a young persons fitness to enter college in pursuit of higher educational goals. Originally, it was called the Scholastic Aptitude Test. But today it is Politically Incorrect even to suggest that nature makes some people smarter than others. In order to reflect the new politics, the name was changed. Now we merely assess students; we do not measure their aptitude or inquire as to how some students can achieve higher scores than others. Heaven forbid that anyone might believe that the races differ in their distributions of mental faculties!
On 29 August 2000, ABC News posted an article online that seemed to suggest that Blacks were leading the way in a resurgence of academic excellence. The article was written by Arlene Levinson, and its title was Math Adds Up: SAT scores hit their highest point in 31 years. Beside the title was a photo showing a classroom full of Black high school students taking the SAT.
Why did ABCNews.Com go out of its way to find a classroom picture in which every student was Black? Obviously, we are meant to associate the title with the picture. This is a standard trick employed by the Jewish media, which also likes to show us Black NASA spokesmen and advertisements featuring Blacks using computers.
But the implication is a false one. Blacks are not now, nor have they ever been, at the forefront of American scholastic achievement. Not even close. You can find a few smart Blacks, certainly. There will always be a percentage of Blacks on the extreme high end of the Black bell curve of IQ. But the media are promoting the myth that Blacks are as smart as Whites in general, and that simply isnt true.
Historically, the achievement of the races on tests of intellectual performance has followed a consistent pattern. Either the Asians or the Whites comes first, with the other group running a close second place. Then come the Hispanics, the mestizos of Mexico, Puerto Rico and Central/South America. The Blacks always appear on the bottom of the list as the lowest scorers; they bring up the rear, every time.
Lets look at the racial difference in the national averages in SAT scores for recent years.
Actually, the lopsidedness is worse than it appears. SAT scores on both parts of the test range from 200 to 800, not from 0 to 800. You get 200 points in each part just for showing up. That 200-point padding is unearned, and it reduces the value of a direct comparison of the averages. If we remove this minimum padding from the composite test scores and average over the three years, Whites get 654 points, while Blacks get only 458 points (out of a possible 1200). Using the same methodology, the Asians have 664 points, while the mestizos get 513. This minimum padding is a kind of camouflage to obscure a failure of multiculturalism.
But padding the minimums isnt the only way in which the liberals cheat. The ABC story states that SAT scores are rising. They might be speaking of a minor fluctuation that will be reversed next year. But the message that the reader is meant to understand is that SAT scores are in a generally upward trend now, and that message is wrong. SAT scores have been declining, in general, ever since the federal government racially integrated the public schools.
It is true that SAT scores have risen. SAT scores rose abruptly in 1995. But the reason for that rise wasnt that high school students had suddenly become smarter. The rise was entirely due to the fact that the liberals, anxious to hide the detrimental effects of racial integration, changed the way the test is scored. The modified scoring technique is called recentering. By and large, the changes have resulted in the addition of up to 130 points to the composite score on the SAT I.
What this means is this: The student who scored, say, 1240 on his SAT in 1994 is smarter than the student who made the same score in 1997. The average White student will gain an extra 100 points as the result of recentering, while the average Black student will pick up an extra 130 points. The average Asian will gain 90 points, and the average mestizo will gain 120 points. Thus not only are the racial gaps artificially narrowed, but also the overall deterioration in the test scores is concealedat least in popular opinion. The admissions departments of American universities might know whats going on, but I never received a call from the Board of Regents telling me that I should add 60 points to what I thought I made on the SAT back in 1983.
When you remove from the composite SAT I score both the 400-point minimum padding and the amounts gained from recentering, the average White student still has 554 points, while the average Black student gets only 328 points. The Asians keep 574 points, and the mestizos retain 393 points. If we normalize these figures to a scale on which the White score is made the standard at 100.0, then the other groups scores go like this: Asians 103.6, mestizos 70.9, Blacks 59.2.
Lets compare these rectified SAT results with scores from a standard test of IQ, the Stanford-9 test. When 4th-, 6th- and 9th-grade students in Fairfax County, Virginia, took the Stanford-9 test in 1999 and 2000, the Whites did better than the other races overall. Lumping together the three age groups and averaging scores for the two years, the scores went like this:
What about the national averages for the Stanford-9? Here they are.
Notice that the racial sequence in that table is, again, Whites (or Asians) first, Asians (or Whites) running a close second, mestizos far behind in third place, and Blacks, as always, dead last.
When the book The Bell Curve was published, liberals (including some highly placed in academe) went on the warpath, each of them eager to find some novel way to deride the work of Herrnstein and Murray as unscientific. Well, maybe their research wasnt as thorough as it should have been, but their main thesis was correct. The races differ in general intelligence, and that difference is not primarily a matter of environmental factors. It is primarily the result of genetic factors.
The racial gap remains even when you consider only the highest achievers in each race. Of the Whites and the Blacks who applied for admission to five top American universities in 1989, the Whites led the Blacks by 186 points in average composite SAT score. Of these high achievers, only 29% of the Blacks scored above 1200 on their SAT, whereas 75% of the Whites did. (See The Shape of the River by Derek Bok and Willem Bowen.) All the liberal talk about how Blacks would achieve comparably to Whites on a level playing field is a big, fat lie. Contrary to liberal dogma, parents income has little effect on childrens test scores. (See The Black-White Test Score Gap by Meredith Phillips.)
And it isnt only the SAT that shows a large racial gap in the scores. In Washington DC public schools, in 1998, 51% of White fourth graders were found to be at or above proficiency in reading, and whereas only 7% of Black fourth graders and 6% of the mestizos met that standard. For eighth graders, 54% of the Whites scored at or above proficiency in reading, whereas only 9% of the Blacks and 11% of the mestizos did.
Well, there you have it. On test after test, no matter how you add it up, Blacks prove to be inferior in reading, writing, and arithmetic. If the job to be done is intellectual, whether programming a computer or designing a skyscraper or planning a space mission or discovering a cure for a disease, Whites will usually perform better than Blacks.
All the money poured into equalizing the races has had little effect. When there is an effect it is often bad. When the test score gap between the races narrows, the liberals cheerbut what if the narrowing were the result of the White students scores going down, rather than that of the Black students scores going up? Thats often the result of multiculturalism in the schools simply because it is easier to get a superior being to do less than his best than it is to get an inferior being to perform above his ability. Is this really something to cheer about? I believe that the liberals would indeed cheer, and I know of no better illustration for the concept of evil than that.
The liberal philosophy of racial equality has thoroughly corrupted testing for intellectual performance. In the first place, the SAT should be scaled so that a student turning in a blank test receives a score of zero, not four hundred. Padding the math and the verbal parts of SAT I merely serves to obscure the intellectual inequalities among students in general, and of the races in particular.
Also, a check of the conversion tables between the original scale and the recentered scale will show that increments in the test score dont flow quite as linearly with increments in the number of correct test answers as they once did. As if mocking the tests name, the recentering process makes the relationship between real scholastic achievement and the SAT scores more difficult to assess. Furthermore, today the SAT is firewalled, meaning that students who miss some of the questions can still be awarded a perfect score, and thus the test loses its ability to discriminate between the very best and the pretty good.
SAT I all-time national average
When you appreciate that the entire purpose of the test is to measure differences in scholastic aptitude or intellectual achievement as finely as possible, you will understand why the scoring process is flawed and why the motives behind it are mendacious. A good test is not padded with a 400-point minimum score so that nobody bottoms out. A good test is not firewalled so that the B students can become A students along with the real A students. A good test is not recentered so that the average student of todays multiracial classrooms can have the same score that the average White student of yesteryear earned.
Forty years ago, when this disaster was getting started, conservatives warned that racial integration would result in lower academic achievement, which, in turn, would cause political pressure to weaken the academic standards, and that is exactly what has happened. Back then the American education system was the envy of the world. Now it is the laughingstock, largely because of false ideology of racial equality and because the liberals have had the power to implement their social policies.
How much worse do things have to get before you will take action to repair the wreckage that the liberals have made of our educational system? How much lower do American SAT scores have to be? How much more poorly educated do American high school graduates need to become, before you will get off your couch and quit listening to the lies told to you by the Jewish bosses of the mass media?
In a way, its not just the high school kids who are faced with an intelligence test. The problems that you face as the result of Jewish media control are also an IQ test of a sortone that you must pass in order to save your country from ruin and your race from destruction. Either you will see past the information faï¿½ade presented by the media and recognize the evil purpose that motivates that fictitious presentationor you wont. If you don't see the evil and realize the necessity of fighting it, then your civilization will end up in the historical trash heap, perhaps sooner than you now believe possible. The danger is here; the hour is late. Why are you idle?
If you pass that test and want to do something to fight the hidden manipulators of our government and our society, then write to us at the National Alliance and ask how you may help us restore our people to racial independence, scholastic excellence and spiritual health. Our address is National Alliance, P.O. Box 90, Hillsboro, West Virginia 24946.
Shortly after a copy of this webpage went on Salon, several liberals ran up and pissed on it. Here's a sample of their posts, and my replies.
Don S. - 10:44 am PDT - Sep 15, 2000 - #8
Jazzhermit - 10:53 am PDT - Sep 15, 2000 - #9
Jerry Abbott - 11:00 am PDT - Sep 15, 2000 - #10
Anthony Cagle - 11:05 am PDT - Sep 15, 2000 - #11
Stylshgal - 11:27 am PDT - Sep 15, 2000 - #12
Jerry Abbott - 12:09 pm PDT - Sep 15, 2000 - #13
Spam, in the context of a web-based discussion with serial postings would be an attempt by one or more persons to bury meaningful, substantive posts by repeatedly posting "fluff," i.e., trivial posts of a few lines, such as Gaylord Tang's "Boooring!" and the subsequent posts by Don S. and Jazzhermit.
Here's something you should remember. TableTalk's management had the power to delete the offending posts, but instead they opted to delete the entire thread. Obviously, this is a subject to which they don't want much attention drawn. I once observed the same kind of behavior on the part of liberal forum managers at MSNBC who, observing liberals losing one argument after another with racists, decided to scrap their RACE IN AMERICA discussion board. Leftists really do behave this way. They're not only wrong; they know they're wrong, and they use censorship and other dishonest tricks as their answer to challenges that they cannot handle with open debate. (Just ask Bradley Smith, Ernst Zundel or David Irving.)
One further note, added 13 December 2000. Recently I went back to Salon Tabletalk to check on another thread that I started, entitled "Race and Crime." It was a long discussion thread, having grown to over a thousand posts over more than a year of debate. During its long existence, nobody noticed any "violation" of "Community Standards" that should cause its removal. At first, therefore, I thought that it had been archived: sent to the museum folder where old discussions may be read (and referred to with links), but not added to with new posts. But I was wrong. The Tabletalk management did not archive my "Race and Crime" discussion. They deleted it, showing once more how dishonest liberals can be. With my facts and my clear presentation, I mostly won every point that I made about the bearing of racial differences on criminal violence. The liberals could not afford to allow my victory to stand; it might persuade someone (especially someone fair-minded) to become a racist.
Oh well. Here's my last round of replies to that now-defunct discussion, which never got posted because of the deletion.
Keith Richards - My analogy was good enough. The things being compared were academic achievement as measured by the SAT and athletic achievement as measured by Olympic competitions. Schools require students to study a wide range of subjects and, hence, no student had been without an opportunity to strengthen his skills for eventual use on the SAT. That's what's important; not whether Olympic athletes do extensive cross-training. Perhaps I should have specified the decathlon?
Elisabeth O. - The problem with your argument (and that of Sienna7) is that the United States has far more poor White citizens than poor Black citizens. If you begin with US citizens who come from families below the federal poverty line, then sort them by race, then for every 100 poor Blacks you'd have 257 poor Whites. There may be more Whites than Blacks who can afford to take prep classes, but there are also more Whites than Blacks who can't (or who don't for some reason other than poverty). Furthermore, the distribution of racial averages holds true for other tests, such as the Stanford-9 TA and for the annual evaluations that high schools make. These don't have "prepping" opportunities, and still the Blacks come out on the bottom (by about the same margin, too). Test-taking might be a "knack," but it is a "knack" that requires some finesse with logic, memory, abstract or creative thinking, and maybe neural efficiency. In other words, you don't solve your problems by calling superior academic performance by Whites a "knack."
David Van Vorous - I suppose you haven't heard of a book called The History and Geography of Human Genes by Cavalli-Sforza, et al. At the gene level, the difference between the races has been observed as differences in gene frequences in a sampling of ethnic populations among Europeans, Asians, Africans, Amerindians, and aborigines in Australia and in the Pacific Islands. Genetic distances have been defined and measured, and they are presented in tables in _HGHG_ for examination.
Paul Buchman - I said "Jewish media" and that's what I meant. It is a fact that the Jews control the mass media for news and entertainment and that they have an agenda that is dangerous to our society. See Who Rules America
His comment, while not incorrect, is imprecise. The glib remark sacrifices completeness in favor of smartassness. Here's the truth: IQ measures the degree to which the IQ-test-taker has the skills necessary for doing well on IQ tests. Those same skills are used in the real world, and there is a strong, postive correlation between scores on IQ tests and success in business, in science, in the professions and in the skilled trades. The questions were designed to challenge the test-taker's capacity for logical thought and problem solving, in order to elicit a response that could be measured. The measurements have turned up racial gaps in ability, and it has become politically fashionable today to deny that the measurements are telling us anything important.
In a similar way, there are tests of motor skills, designed to measure the test-taker's hand-eye coordination. Would Bebbington criticize these tests for not modeling every possible way in which such coordination is used in real life? I assume that he would not. But he does criticize the IQ test for not modeling every possible way in which logical thought and problem solving are used in real life.
Well, phooey! Such a test as he would demand would, to say the least, be extraordinarily lengthy and expensive to prepare and to administer. IQ tests can probably be improved, but the current tests have had some success in predicting intellectual performance in the working world. In science, a theory lives or dies according to its ability to make correct predictions. The IQ tests live!
You wouldn't have to do that. Alone and in a natural environment, your ability to solve problems would continually be challenged. Nature gives its own kind of IQ test; however, the penalty for failing is usually death. In this situation, you could measure your "score" by the number of days you were able to stay alive. And if you weren't quite alone in the world, you could measure your success by how many children you could sustain with food, shelter and protection. So the concept of IQ remains a valid one, at least in essence, whether the tests are scored by computers or by whether or not you can survive.
Political correctness is a kind of mental disease that most greatly affects liberals (though conservatives also frequently succumb). It prevents the afflicted from recognizing truth even when it parades naked in front of them. You sometimes want to tell these "IQ is the result of environment not heredity" morons to take a baby chimpanzee from the zoo, raise it however they think best, and then give it an SAT or a Stanford-Binet test when it reaches its prime of life.