Mike Ford's Grades?
- Thread starter Mav^
- Start date
There is a serious problem in using a fixed score cutoff on standardized tests like the SAT and ACT to make high-stakes decisions such as scholarship and intercollegiate athletic eligibility. This usage violates ACT guidelines for proper test use, and entire careers can be ruined by misuse of test scores.
A study at the University of Michigan, which reviewed the pre-Prop. 48 records of students who would have been barred from competition due to low test scores, found eighty-six percent successfully completed their first year. Those student-athletes then graduated at rates higher than the general student population.
A study at the University of Michigan, which reviewed the pre-Prop. 48 records of students who would have been barred from competition due to low test scores, found eighty-six percent successfully completed their first year. Those student-athletes then graduated at rates higher than the general student population.
I believe she took all the advanced classes, but I think you hit it on the head when you said the school did a poor job. Some of her teachers probably couldn't make any better than that on the ACT themselves. She only took the test once and was very nervous when she took it, but her main problem I think was moving away from home and living on her own at a dorm as far as dropping out.NYBamaFan said:
I made a 23 on the ACT back in 1980 when I graduated which by the way was the same score as our salutarorians(sp) score was and I had a not so great B average. Our Valedictorian scored a 29 so that goes to show maybe mine and my daughters alma matre don't quite measure up to standard, lol! Of course most of you allready knew that from my past post, lol! :biggrin:
That is not true at all, there is nothing wrong with scoring a 23 with straight A's. I was an A/B student in high school and scored a 23 myself. the ACT is not an easy test, there is a reason that schools start handing out scholarships at 25. If every A student in the country were to get a 30 on the ACT then they wouldn't be able to give scholarships until around 31-32, considering the test only goes up to 36 and is around 6 hours long with 4 different disciplines anything over 20 is a good score above 25 is great, 30 and above is spectacular.NYBamaFan said:
Also contrary to popular belief high school does not at all prepare you for college, they are two totally different animals. The papers and projects that are given in high school because they "give them in college" are bogus, in my opinion college is easier in many aspects.
I certainly did not mean to offend, and if I did, I offer my apologies. 23 is certainly a good score. 30 is a great score. My point was that a student that makes it through a school's toughest courses with a 4.0 GPA (or close) should be a real star, capable of a great score on the ACT. If a student does that well in those classes and scores poorly on the ACT, those classes were not properly developed, or the grading was not tough enough.jblackb042 said:
A's are for excellence. Schools hand out A's like candy. It hurts the students, as they think that they can coast through life. Those kids get kicked in the teeth when they attend a tough university.
Still, a 16 is easily attainable - even for those who are study habit challenged. If you cannot score higher than a 16 on the ACT, you do not belong in a major university. You need to attend a smaller college, where the classes are smaller and students get the individual attention simply absent at schools like Alabama...
I used to think the same way, but after I've been teaching for a year, some students are just not good test takers. I can get them to orally communicate questions and answers all day long but when it comes to taking test - especially multiple choice tests - they do NOT do well at all.NYBamaFan said:
That being said, it is not necessarily the case for Mike. I have stated before and will again that Hargrave is probably the best thing that could've happened to him b/c they focus on testing skills and basically learning to "study."
Agreed, which is part of the rationale that keeps schools from sticking to test scores exclusively. Test taking is a skill, itself. It can be taught, and I am sure that Mike has been exposed to the material that would improve his performance as much as those classes can, but most of those classes are engineered for top students who are trying to raise a 30 to a 33, not a 15 to a 17.runtheoption22 said:
The real issue is the dedication to learning. How can one excel in one arena and fail in another? Is it all talent? Where does desire come into play? Mike has to decide that he is going to become a good student for it's own sake, not to get into Bama. If he is only trying to raise the score to gain admission, I really don't see much improvement on the horizon. Even if he gains admission, I fear that he will not do well in class. If only he had better guidance at an earlier age...
I made rather high on both standardized tests (1390) and still got scraps on the floor for scholly money from the University of Alabama. I do better on real tests than standardized tests though. Ol' Bob Witt doesn't like to help the out-of-staters who pay 2.5 times in-state tuition either. I agree some people don't test well, but then again, there are some unintelligent people also, in college and not in college. Example: a girl in my EN101 class. Context: We were discussing ARISTOTLE! Quote: "Was this written before or after HITLER?" :conf2: Now you tell me? HERE'S YOUR SIGN!! :biggrin:
Some people...
are not good test takers, and some are set up well, mentally and otherwise, to do well. When I entered law school (dark ages) there were three top scores on the LSAT. Two of us were rather close, and one guy was about 25 points above us (scales have changed). It turned out that a large portion of the test was based on the thinking of one particular English philosopher. In the first semester, we three discussed the tests. My friend who had edged me out for #2 was somewhat familiar with the British writer. He was a Bama A&S grad. The Vandy A&S grad who beat us both had had an entire course based on the thinking of this philosopher. Me?, I was a C&BA guy. I'd never heard of the Brit. My Vandy friend said he could have written the questions (which were all about logic, but it would have helped to know what was coming). The lesson I'm positing here is about handicaps in taking standardized tests. I'd hate to be a black kid, coming out of the typical HS background, taking a standardized test where the real standard is an idealized middle-class, suburban white kid...
are not good test takers, and some are set up well, mentally and otherwise, to do well. When I entered law school (dark ages) there were three top scores on the LSAT. Two of us were rather close, and one guy was about 25 points above us (scales have changed). It turned out that a large portion of the test was based on the thinking of one particular English philosopher. In the first semester, we three discussed the tests. My friend who had edged me out for #2 was somewhat familiar with the British writer. He was a Bama A&S grad. The Vandy A&S grad who beat us both had had an entire course based on the thinking of this philosopher. Me?, I was a C&BA guy. I'd never heard of the Brit. My Vandy friend said he could have written the questions (which were all about logic, but it would have helped to know what was coming). The lesson I'm positing here is about handicaps in taking standardized tests. I'd hate to be a black kid, coming out of the typical HS background, taking a standardized test where the real standard is an idealized middle-class, suburban white kid...
TIDE-HSV said:
Your point is well taken. I too had trouble with standardized tests when I was his age. However, I agree with NYBamaFan with respect to overcoming his academic obstacles. Effort will be the final determining factor.
I have taken a lot of standardized tests in my day (ACT, SAT, MAT and GRE) and I think the SAT is, by far, a more objective exam than the ACT. I do not understand why more athletes do not opt for it.
Hopefully, Mr. Ford (after watching his film this is the way I will address him from now on) will rise to the occasion and earn himself a crimson jersey next fall.
The national average is 20.5??? Granted I just graduated 6 years ago, but in my senior class I can think of at least a dozen of us who scored 30 or higher. And that's out of a class of about 180.
Also, the point about being or not being a good test taker is very valid. Some people just don't perform well on tests.
I do disagree with NY's theory that high schools do not put bright kids at a disadvantage. Of the 15 or twenty of us who took all the honors and AP classes, there were two groups: the ones who worked hard to get it, and the ones who just got it. I was in the latter group. The ones who worked hard to get it have now all graduated college at the top of their class (two Valedictorians). Half of the ones who just got it have yet to finish, myself included. Incidentally, the two highest scores from our class on the ACT, a friend with 34 and myself with 35, both ended up on acedemic probation after our freshman years.
I have a grievance with the form and curriculum of our secondary schools. I never had to study for anythiing, and therefore never learned to study. In high school, I didn't take notes, didn't show up for class unless I wanted to or there was a test. When I went to college, I was still in that mode. Unfortunately, it took me over a year to realize that I did have to go to class, and to learn how to take notes and study. And I'm still not very good at it.
And the point of it is that every person I knew in high school in that situation, where they didn't have to work for it, ended up in the same boat. And, at least for the most part, booze wasn't the problem, it was being unprepared.
And, yes, I agree that some of that responsibility has to be shouldered by the student. However, the lion's share does not go to the 14-18 year old student, but to the faculty, administration, and system charged with preparing that student for the future.
The system doesn't work. IF you are a "normal", preferably middle-class, average intelligence student, the curriculum works great for you. If you aren't, then the system fails you. The US ranks in the cellar when it comes to academia, and it has nothing to do with us not having the best and the brightest, it has to do with a poor educational system.
Ok, I'll get off my little soapbox now.
Also, the point about being or not being a good test taker is very valid. Some people just don't perform well on tests.
I do disagree with NY's theory that high schools do not put bright kids at a disadvantage. Of the 15 or twenty of us who took all the honors and AP classes, there were two groups: the ones who worked hard to get it, and the ones who just got it. I was in the latter group. The ones who worked hard to get it have now all graduated college at the top of their class (two Valedictorians). Half of the ones who just got it have yet to finish, myself included. Incidentally, the two highest scores from our class on the ACT, a friend with 34 and myself with 35, both ended up on acedemic probation after our freshman years.
I have a grievance with the form and curriculum of our secondary schools. I never had to study for anythiing, and therefore never learned to study. In high school, I didn't take notes, didn't show up for class unless I wanted to or there was a test. When I went to college, I was still in that mode. Unfortunately, it took me over a year to realize that I did have to go to class, and to learn how to take notes and study. And I'm still not very good at it.
And the point of it is that every person I knew in high school in that situation, where they didn't have to work for it, ended up in the same boat. And, at least for the most part, booze wasn't the problem, it was being unprepared.
And, yes, I agree that some of that responsibility has to be shouldered by the student. However, the lion's share does not go to the 14-18 year old student, but to the faculty, administration, and system charged with preparing that student for the future.
The system doesn't work. IF you are a "normal", preferably middle-class, average intelligence student, the curriculum works great for you. If you aren't, then the system fails you. The US ranks in the cellar when it comes to academia, and it has nothing to do with us not having the best and the brightest, it has to do with a poor educational system.
Ok, I'll get off my little soapbox now.
Coffee, in Florence.
And, no, I'm not exaggerating. And, while I have issues with the way high schools are run, I do believe that Coffee (now Florence High) was one of the better ones, and the teachers did a good job at preparing the students for tests. The problem is, that was the only thing some of us were good at.
I think that most teachers do the best they can, I think the system and curriculum just needs to be changed. I personally like a Montessori type system.
And, no, I'm not exaggerating. And, while I have issues with the way high schools are run, I do believe that Coffee (now Florence High) was one of the better ones, and the teachers did a good job at preparing the students for tests. The problem is, that was the only thing some of us were good at.
I think that most teachers do the best they can, I think the system and curriculum just needs to be changed. I personally like a Montessori type system.
These standardized tests often afford strange results.
As a bright, if under-motivated high school student, I clocked a blistering 20 on the ACT. While always disappointed by that result, it got me into college, so I never felt compelled to sit through six hours again just to try and salve my ego.
However, a few years later, I scored a 6/7/7/8 (9 place stanine scale) on the Naval & Marine Corps Aviation Selection Test Battery (ASTB) and later a 580 (98th percentile) on the Miller Analogies Test (MAT) to get into grad school.
I may have made up a bit of lost ground in college, but not enough to explain why that ACT kicked my patoot.
I've been suspicious of that test ever since. RTR.
As a bright, if under-motivated high school student, I clocked a blistering 20 on the ACT. While always disappointed by that result, it got me into college, so I never felt compelled to sit through six hours again just to try and salve my ego.
However, a few years later, I scored a 6/7/7/8 (9 place stanine scale) on the Naval & Marine Corps Aviation Selection Test Battery (ASTB) and later a 580 (98th percentile) on the Miller Analogies Test (MAT) to get into grad school.
I may have made up a bit of lost ground in college, but not enough to explain why that ACT kicked my patoot.
I've been suspicious of that test ever since. RTR.
I may be wrong but I really think that the pay that teachers in Alabama recieve tends to dictate what kind of teachers our kids are being taught by. I know there is some great teachers in highschool and beyond but on average they are not the most gifted products coming out of our university's.uafan4life said:
More tax payers money ain't gonna help either. I don't know the answer but I would say as in Mike Fords and a lot of these kids it starts at home. Teachers can only do so much and no system will ever be perfect for every student. Hopefully Mike can get qualified and I believe if he will listen to our coaches then he can have a great carreer at Bama and down the road. If not maybe he can play in a lower division just so he has a chance to make it to the NFL. He looks to have a lot of talent and hopefully he will get a chance to show us just how much.
What do you mean?Boclive said:Did you personally find that the English, Reading, and Science sections of the test helped to support the Mathematics score you received?
I had a 36 on the math.
Latest threads
-
-
-
In N Out Burger leaving blue state- Started by bamamc1
- Replies: 25
-
BREAKING Philip Rivers officially retires as a Charger today. Great video.- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 0