Our amazingly low 12th grade TIMSS Math
score of 461 simply cannot be explained by any ordinary known differences
between races and sexes and requires a detailed analysis of the historic 154
point gap between Whites in Iowa and Whites in New York. Once we realize
that Catholic Whites in mostly Catholic states score more than 200 SAT Math
points lower than Protestant Whites in mostly Protestant states, the differences
begin to make sense:
Race/Religion
Iowa
Rhode Island
New
York
North Dakota
SAT M Whites
613
516
535
610
non-Hispanic
White
91.0%
79.3%
62.0%
66.0%
Hispanic
3.8%
11.2%
15.1%
15.1%
Catholic
17.1%
59.2%
37.6%
22.2%
White
Catholic
13.3%
48.0%
22.5%
7.1%
White
Protestant
77.7%
31.3%
39.5%
58.9%
Cath as pct
White
14.6%
60.5%
36.3%
10.8%
Prot as pct
White
85.4%
39.5%
63.7%
89.2%
Protestant
White
661.3
661.3
635
635
Catholic
White
421.2
421.2
360
360
Indian
449
480
Asian
661
527
569
638
Black
502
403
421
402
Hispanic
521
404
439
Supreme Court Banned
School Prayer in 1963, SAT Scores Plunged 108-120 Points, Extra
Education
Costs Exceeded $7.7 Trillion.
SAT I MEAN SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS
FOR MALES, FEMALES, AND TOTAL BY ETHNIC GROUP
SAT I Verbal
SAT I Math
Mean Scores
Standard Deviations
Mean Scores
Standard Deviations
SAT I Test Takers Who Described Themselves as:
Males
Females
Total
Males
Females
Total
Males
Females
Total
Males
Females
Total
American Indian or Alaskan Native
485
481
483
104
102
103
495
462
477
107
98
104
Asian, Asian American, or Pacific Islander
497
494
496
127
127
127
575
541
558
121
118
120
Black or African American
431
437
434
100
99
99
431
416
422
100
92
96
Hispanic or Latino Background:
Mexican or Mexican American
462
449
455
103
100
101
480
442
459
103
93
99
Puerto Rican
454
450
452
107
102
104
462
431
445
105
96
101
Latin American, South American, Central American, or Other Hispanic
or Latino
472
461
465
109
108
109
489
449
466
110
101
107
White
528
524
526
102
100
101
542
507
523
106
100
104
Other
517
507
511
122
118
120
536
493
512
117
112
116
No Response
485
487
486
122
124
123
506
480
494
122
119
121
Two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT Math are White boys and only one
third are White girls. One percent of blacks who are 12% of the population
score over 600, which means they ought to represent at most 0.12 percent of
college admissions. 52% of Asians who represent 4% of the population score
over 600, so they ought to represent at most 2% of college admissions. For
every one White girl admitted to college, there should be two White boys, but
instead it's the other way around, with boys being only 41% and girls 59%.
Each 1 point difference in IQ is equivalent to a 4 point difference in SAT math
scores. There's only one explanation for why White boys in Iowa and many
other White-only or White-mostly states consistently score 80 SAT math points
higher than the national average for "Caucasian boys": their average IQ is 128,
which is 10 points higher than Asian boys, 20 points higher than "Caucasian
boys", 28 points higher than "Caucasian girls", and 53 points higher than black
girls:
Race & Sex
SAT Math
Published IQ
Asian Boys
592
118
Iowa boys
631
128 est
Caucasian Boys
551
108
Asian Girls
558
110
Nigger Boys
431
78
Indian Boys
498
95
Mexican Boys
476
90
Caucasian Girls
517
100
jew boys
458
85
Mexican Girls
438
80
jew girls
438
80
Indian Girls
466
87
Nigger Girls
421
75
The "SAT Math Scores for 2005 Highest on Record" LIE
The College Board home page
has this glowing news about how "SAT Math Scores for 2005 Highest on Record",
which of course they know is the mantra du jour which will be repeated ad infinitum by
mediots who wouldn't dare check with the College Board's
own data,
much less challenge such a "positive" statement about the state of US education.
After all, we have a war on terror to fight, so how does accuracy in media advance
THAT cause (plus isn't it racist and sexist to do so)?
Let's be racists and sexists and analyze the FACTS on the College Board's own web site
which by themselves prove the headline to be a LIE--without even correcting how they LIED
with statistics on top of that. Their page "Table 2: Mean SAT Scores of College-Bound Seniors, 1967–2005*" reports that SAT Verbal scores between 1967
and 2005 for girls dropped a whopping 40 points from 545 to 505, and for boys a whopping
27 points, from 540 to 513. They also hope that the mediots who repeat the mantra du
jour don't question the following simple truths:
The test changed so drastically that girls transitioned from scoring 5 points higher
than boys to 8 points lower.
Scores between 1960 to 1967, when the vast majority of the plunge in scores occurred,
are not reported.
All that "recentering" SAT scores accomplished was to "increase" the
scores of nigger girls from 310 to 411.
The 3 point "increase" in boys' math scores from 535 to 538, and the 9 point
"increase" for girls from 495 to 504 is not even statistically significant.
Between 1967 and 2005, there was no increase in math scores, even by the SAT's own
biased estimates. The combined 67 point drop in verbal scores can hardly be
described as "higher than ever". Had they been HONEST about it, they would
have included the 69 point drop in scores from 975 in 1960 to 906 in 1975 by the old scale. Instead, by the new,
or "recentered" scale, between 1967 and 1974, they report only that verbal
scores dropped from 543 to 521 or 22 points and that math scores dropped from 516 to 505,
or 11 points, for a total drop of only 33 points. The lion's share of the drop in
scores, another 36 points, occurred BEFORE the 1967 starting point of this table.
It's precisely this knee jerk change in the statistic, the critical part of any
statistical analysis, which the College Board omits from its charts, data, tables,
reports, and analyses, and this is called "LYING With Statistics 101".
For "men" [read: the American couch potato who WILL believe this feminazi
LIE] to understand this, let's put the stats in sports terms. This would be like
reporting the three points the Forty Niners got in the last three quarters while ignoring
the 12 points the Rams got and the zero points that the Forty Niners got in the first
quarter.
Unless you know the first part, how would you know that the Forty Niners had already
lost the game? Unless you consider WHY scores suddenly started to drop, and WHEN,
how can you even begin to trace the source of the problem?
GRE Gender Gap LEAPFROGGED 22 POINTS
The above also ignores something that may be even more
important and significant than what they DID report, which is that the College
Board's OWN data shows the gender gap at the graduate school level between
AMERICAN Asian men and AMERICAN black women LEAPFROGGED 33 points, from a "mere"
234 to a whopping 267 between 1997 and 2002. Even in this day and age of the internet, less than
7% of Americans know this, mainly because they failed to even put out a press
release and mediots just can't be bothered to do such SIMPLE research on the College
Board's OWN web site:
This "gender gap" between the sexes of EVERY race is not
insignificant. Even before the above mentioned increase, it was bigger for
some races than the gap in PISA math scores between Mexico and the U.S. (which
represents a four fold difference in per capita income), or Israel and Belgium.
It's bigger than the gap in TIMSS math scores between the US and Lebanon.
Following is the comparison after this increase in the
"gender gap" between 1997 and 2002 is considered, with this increase represented
in
red:
DE-EDUCATION: OUR TWELFTH GRADE GIRLS SCORE 76 POINTS LOWER THAN OUR EIGHTH
GRADE BOYS
An even bigger problem that the SAT scores and
the agency conducting these tests either ignore or don't even know was revealed
by TIMSS, a very objective, scientific, comprehensive study of more than half a
million students in 46 countries around the world, 16 of whose 12th graders
participated in TIMSS Physics. The boys in 9 of those countries scored
higher than the 8th grade physics score, while our boys scored 56 points LOWER.
The girls in 3 of those countries scored higher, but our girls scored 104 points
LOWER, an inexplicable phenomenon which resulted in an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE
increase in the already significant "gender gap", from 5 points to 51 points.
How can it be explained, and
how can our "news" media continued to IGNORE, that where Swiss 8th graders scored 46 points higher than ours in math, their 12th
grade boys scored 102 points higher than our boys and 133 points higher than our girls,
something pure SAT scores simply cannot reveal. What SAT is testing at the
12th grade level is a severely dumbed down, handicapped population of students
who don't have a clue where they stand in the "global economy", and clearly will
never have an opportunity to compete in it.
To keep this problem hidden
from view, our "educators", mediots, bureaucrats, and politicians compare 8th
grade scores which GREATLY understates the problem: the last four years of a
student's education is the most important part, and 8th grade scores completely
miss that part. Furthermore, the following graphs exclude 12th graders
from Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore whose 8th graders scored more than
100 points higher than ours, and we really have NO data about their progress
from 8th to 12th grade. Considering how many of the countries who DID
participate experienced such a HUGE increase, the odds are very good that their
increase was dramatically higher.
Based ONLY on a correlation of TIMSS physics scores with
Professor Lynn's "IQ of Nations" adjusted to correlate them more closely, the
"gender gap" in IQ for all American races is 9 points, with boys having an
average IQ of 87 and girls 78.
UNDER-REPORTING OF SCORES FOR THE WHITE RACE
The only way to explain the 154 SAT point gap
between Whites in Iowa and "whites" in New York is that New York counts a lot of
people who are not WHITES as "white", like jews who are the eternal ENEMIES of
Whites, "white" Hispanics who score only a few points higher than "Hispanics"
like Mexicans and Puerto Ricans, and blacks who report themselves as "white" on
many of these standardized tests:
From 1960 to 1980 SAT
scores decreased 85 points, from 975 to 890, an "inexplicable" event which some
have attributed to the banning of school prayer by the Supreme Court in July 1963.
In addition, the National Association of Scholars reports in "Academic
Questions" that a person taking the SAT in 1990 would have scored 23-35 points higher
than he scored on the 1960 test. Between 1980 and 1995, the scores increased 20
points, for a net decrease of 88-100 points. Was this 20 point increase real? This is
hard to determine for certain because of changes in the questions on the test, and
re-centering of the test scores. Was there an improvement in academic performance? A
disclaimer by NCES that SAT scores increased 14 points during the same timeframe that ACT
scores remained flat suggests that at least 14 of this 20 point increase was not due to
improved academic performance after 1991:
Between 1991 and
1995, the percentage of graduating seniors taking the American College Testing (ACT)
program increased 5 percentage points, while the percentage taking the
SAT remained the same. While scores on
the ACT remained about the same over this time period, scores on the SAT rose 14 points.
The actual state of US
education in 1995 was 102-114 SAT points lower than it was in 1960, the equivalent of
51-57 TIMSS points, and 20-23 NAEP points.
RECENTERED OR JUST DUMBED DOWN!
"There is little evidence [read:
research] showing the relationship between the Scholastic Assessment Test
(SAT) and g (general intelligence). This research established the relationship
between SAT and g, as well as the appropriateness of the SAT as a measure of g,
and examined the SAT as a premorbid measure of intelligence. In Study 1, we used
the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Measures of g were extracted
from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and correlated with SAT
scores of 917 participants. The resulting correlation was.82 (.86 corrected for
nonlinearity). Study 2 investigated the correlation between revised and
recentered SAT scores and scores on the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices
among 104 undergraduates. The resulting correlation was.483 (.72 corrected for
restricted range). These studies indicate that the SAT is mainly a test of g. We
provide equations for converting SAT scores to estimated IQs; such conversion
could be useful for estimating premorbid IQ or conducting individual difference
research with college students."
Educators almost uniformly
insist that this 102-114 point decrease in SAT scores is due to an increase in the percent
of students taking the test, which implies that a decrease in the median quality of the
students taking the test is the root problem. But, at the least, between 1972 and
1980, this was definitely not the case. The number of test takers declined from 1,023,000
to 992,000, while scores decreased 36 points, and as the number of both 18 year olds and
high school graduates increased. If this had been a factor, then the larger number
of students graduating combined with a smaller number taking the SAT should have caused an
*increase*, rather than a 36 point decrease, in scores. In addition, the percent of
the US population which took the SAT during that time decreased from 0.5% to 0.41%.
INCREASE IN
MINORITY TEST-TAKERS REDUCES SCORES 35 POINTS
The percent of test takers
who are minorities increased from zero in 1973 to thirty one percent in 1995.
Minorities' median SAT score is 833, which is 113 points lower than the 946 SAT score for
whites in 1995. If all test takers in 1995 were whites, average SAT scores would
have been 36 points higher, or 946 rather than 910.
COMPARING TIMSS TO
SAT AND NAEP
International comparisons
can be made between education factors like classroom size, education spending, teachers'
sex, and school prayer by correlating these standardized test scores as follows:
South
Carolina
California
US
North
Dakota
Hi-Low
NAEP
261
263
271
284
27
8th Grade
TIMSS
485
500
500
550
65
SAT Math
437
484
476
567
130
One NAEP point = 6 SAT Math points and 2.4 TIMSS points
One
TIMSS point = 2 SAT Math points and 1/4th NAEP point
One SAT point = 1/2 TIMSS point and 1/5th NAEP point
CLASSROOM SIZE
When the eighth grade
TIMSS Math scores are correlated to the average number of students
per classroom for the various countries for which all of the data is available, it is
seen that adding one additional student to a classroom increases TIMSS scores by four
points. Thus it is likely that the decrease in the average number of students in US schools from 29 in 1960 to 24 in
1996 caused a decrease in math skills which is equivalent to 20 TIMSS points, or 10 SAT
Math point..
EDUCATION SPENDING
A similar analysis of the
relationship of education spending to eighth grade TIMSS
Math scores shows that a one percent increase in the percent of GDP a country spends for
education reduces scores by forty TIMSS points. Thus it is likely that the increase from
4.8% to 7.6% of US GDP spent for education in the last four
decades caused a decrease in math skills which is equivalent to a 112 TIMSS point
decrease, or 56 SAT Math points.
PERCENT OF GIRLS
TAKING TEST
The percent of test takers
who are girls increased from 49.5% to 52.5% which decreased the median SAT Math score by 2
points.
TEACHERS' SEX
Similarly, each 1%
increase in the percent of teachers who are men in
the countries whose eighth graders participated in TIMSS increases their score by five
points. Thus it is likely that the decrease in the US in the last 4 decades of the
percent of teachers who are men from 31.3% to 25.6% caused a decrease in math skills which
is equivalent to 28.5 TIMSS points, or 14 SAT Math Points.
This means that the actual
state of US education after taking into account the increase in minorities taking the SAT
test was 66-78 SAT points lower in 1995 than in 1960:
Predicted Decrease in SAT
Scores
Number of Points
Increase In Minorities
36 Points
Decrease In Students Per Class
20 Points
Increase In Education Costs
56 Points
Decrease In Men Teachers
14 Points
Increase In Percent of Girls Taking SAT
Test
2 Points
Total Predicted Decrease in SAT Scores
128
Actual Decrease in SAT Scores
1960-1980
85 points
Changes in Test Before 1990
23-35 points
Re-centering of Test After 1990
14 points
Less Increase Since 1980
20 points
Total Actual Decrease Since 1960
102-114 points
STATE OF US
EDUCATION WITHOUT DECREASE
American 13 year olds
scored second from last in the International Assessment of Education Progress taken in
1991, ahead of only Jordan. The crosslink studies
between the National Assessment of Education Progress and the IAEP show that the District
of Columbia ranks behind Jordan, that California ranks lower than the US average, and that
the highest scoring state, North Dakota, ranks between the US average and Taiwan.
North Dakota scored 107
SAT Math points higher than California and 100 points higher than the national
average. Had it not been for this 67-78 point decrease in SAT scores, the US would
have been 22 to 33 points lower than North Dakota on the above graph.
The distribution of scores
between California and North Dakota, whose average SAT Math scores are different by 107
points, would look like the following with a standard deviation of 70 points. In
other words, there might be only a small overlap between the high end of California's
students and the low end of North Dakota's, which may be the case between the various
countries participating in TIMSS.
TIMSS (The Third
International Math and Science Study)
This study shows a similar
relationship of American 8th grade math scores to the rest of the world. California and
Louisiana were below the US average, which was one of the lowest scoring countries in the
study. North Dakota ranked ahead of the US average, about midway between us and the
highest scoring countries. Had US education quality not decreased the equivalent of
20-23 NAEP points since 1960 we would have ranked ahead of France and Israel and slightly
behind Hungary and Switzerland. Because the majority of the non-public schools are
religious schools which teach religion, ethics, morals, spirituality, and Christianity
(just as the public schools in most of those countries which rank so far ahead of us do,
and just as our schools did prior to the banning of school prayer) this is approximately
where most of them rank today:
GRADUATE RECORD
EXAMINATION VERBAL SCORES DOWN 57 POINTS
Between 1965 and 1996
scores on the verbal section of the GRE decreased 57 points, while the scores in some
subjects http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/digest97/d97t311.html
like education and chemistry increased. Education majors scored consistently 150 to
200 points lower than chemistry majors until 1994 when education majors' scores suddenly
jumped 31 points. As there was no national program to improve the quality of
education majors or teachers which would have been responsible for this jump, it's likely
that this is due to a change in the test itself.
The US Department of
Education makes a big issue of the reported 12 point "increase" in the SAT Math
scores of blacks and Whites between 1986 and 1997. The problem is that other test scores
like ACT show that test scores during that time remained flat or
even decreased. The scoring of the SAT clearly changed, which means that the SAT is no
longer valid in comparing data prior to this change to data after the change. It is
intentionally misleading. They also ignore that "multiculturalism" in
education caused an increase in inter-racial marriages, and that the offspring of blacks
and Whites are still characterized as "black" even though their test scores fall
between the average for blacks and the average for Whites. The upper two percentile
of college bound black women score in the same range as the median scores of college bound
White men. It's more significant that this race mixing did not cause black scores
to increase.
CONCLUSION: SCHOOL
PRAYER
To deny that SAT scores
are down, thus denying that education quality in the US is abysmal, is to insist that US
education quality has always been in last place in the world. There is no question
that the US had a reasonable education system before the Supreme Court banned school
prayer in 1963. The only question is whether or not this reduction in SAT scores is
representative of an actual decrease in IQs. Only those
countries which banned or de-emphasized school prayer have experienced such severe
problems in education as the US has. Nobody can claim to have benefited from the
resulting decrease in education quality and incomes and personal savings, and the increase
in crime and prisons and illegitimacy and divorce, which resulted from this single heinous
act.
CRIMINAL JOHN
MOORES FLAUNTS PROPOSITION 209, AGAINST THE WILL OF WE THE PEOPLE
At UC Berkeley, where it's called "comprehensive review," the system is under
attack. A study last month commissioned by UC Board of Regents Chairman John Moores and
reported by the Los Angeles Times found that in 2002
Berkeley admitted
375 students with SAT scores between 600 and 1000, and rejected about 3,200 students with
SAT scores above 1400.
Data subsequently released by the University of California show that UC Berkeley and
UCLA in the past two years collectively have rejected more than
10,000
applicants who scored above 1400 (out of a possible 1600) on the SAT. That's nearly
half the applicants in that category who applied to Berkeley, and nearly a third of those
who applied to UCLA.
Critics of the policies have pointed to a report by John Moore, a member of the
University of California System Board of Regents. Moore's report suggests UC-Berkeley only
accepted about
56 percent
of applicants with SAT scores higher than 1400.
A PUBLIC STATEMENT TO STATE
PUBLIC ENEMY
JOHN MOORES
Not a single unqualified nigger, latrino, chicano, Hispanic, or other
mud has a *right* to attend public universities at taxpayers' expense. Our public
universities receive tax dollars for the express purpose of educating the educable, not
social engineering to make the uneducable "feel good" about themselves
Modified
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Copyright @ 2007 by
Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party