Let me be real clear: this message board does NOT need conservatives

[DemonTree]

@Babale

I will do my best to ensure I understand you, yes. Again, I apologize for my poor phrasing.

Thank you. Although you are apologising for the wrong thing here. I don’t blame anyone for a misunderstanding; those are inevitable. It’s how you deal with it that’s important.

@Babale

They are only an accurate measure of college GPA insofar as part of your GPA is determined by your test taking ability. I dispute that these tests measures anything particularly inherent to the individual (except as far as the individual’s experiences can be said to be inherent to them), or that it should be used to determine how “worthy” someone is of receiving higher education, which you apparently disagree with.

I think the two biggest factors in how someone does on a test are their intelligence, and knowledge of the subject. Which of these is more important depends on the test. ‘Test taking skills’ will make some contribution, varying according to the individual. And to be honest I find it quite baffling that you could believe otherwise. Surely at your high school there were kids who did well in their work, and kids who struggled? Kids who easily understood the material, and kids who didn’t? Kids who you would ask for help, and those who would ask you (maybe reversed in different subjects)? And when the class took a test, the results would reflect this, much in the way you would expect if tests measure learning and (academic) ability?

Are these things inherent to an individual? What does that even mean? If you’ve acquired skills and knowledge, you’re in a different position to someone who hasn’t. If you don’t learn tennis until you are an adult, you’re almost certainly never going to win at Wimbledon, and you will probably not be ready for advanced training, no matter how naturally talented you might be. As for the relevant talent, twin and adoption studies show IQ is very little affected by environment, and is substantially heritable (up to 80%). But the existence of the Flynn effect suggests this is not true on a group level. If only we could work out what causes it!

@Babale

I also don’t see why you, an outside observer, would care what someone’s college GPA is, unless maybe you ask when hiring them for their first job out of college (and even then a 4.0 at one university is not the same as a 4.0 at another). Whether students at a given college have a high GPA overall is certainly not a useful measure of whether that college is teaching them useful skills.

It’s somewhat debateable whether the purpose of college for most people is to teach useful skills, or to serve as a signal of ability - the ability to qualify in the first place, and stick with it for several years, motivate yourself to do the work and reach a given standard. If you eliminate standards, then it no longer serves that function - which might be one way of reducing the importance of higher education.

And that is what I think we should try to do as a society. Reduce the importance of degrees and higher educational qualifications in general, and go back to learning on the job where that is feasible. It seems to me that we have produced a society of haves and have-nots - one in which education is a major divider between the two - and juggling who gets to be in which category is not addressing the real problem.