andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2010 andrew_gelman_stats-2010-94 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining

94 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-SAT stories


meta infos for this blog

Source: html

Introduction: I received a bunch of interesting comments on my blog on adjusting SAT scores. Below I have a long comment from a colleague with experience in the field. But first, this hilarious (from a statistical perspective) story from Howard Wainer: Some years ago when we were visiting Harvard [as a parent of a potential student, not in Howard's role as educational researcher], an admissions director said two things of relevance (i) the SAT hasn’t got enough ‘top’ for Harvard — it doesn’t discriminate well enough at the high end. To prove this she said (ii) that Harvard had more than 1500 ‘perfect 1600s’ apply. Some were rejected. I mentioned that there were only about 750 1600s from HS seniors in the US — about 400 had 1600 in their junior year (and obviously didn’t retake) and about 350 from their senior year. So, I concluded, she must be mistaken. Then I found out that they allowed applicants to pick and choose their highest SAT-V score and their highest SAT-M score from separate adm


Summary: the most important sentenses genereted by tfidf model

sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore

1 I received a bunch of interesting comments on my blog on adjusting SAT scores. [sent-1, score-0.147]

2 Below I have a long comment from a colleague with experience in the field. [sent-2, score-0.216]

3 I mentioned that there were only about 750 1600s from HS seniors in the US — about 400 had 1600 in their junior year (and obviously didn’t retake) and about 350 from their senior year. [sent-6, score-0.09]

4 Then I found out that they allowed applicants to pick and choose their highest SAT-V score and their highest SAT-M score from separate administrations, and so constructed their 1500. [sent-8, score-0.709]

5 I stopped talking at that point, deciding against discussing the probability of throwing snake eyes if you cold throw dice many times and pick out a one from one toss and the other one from another. [sent-9, score-0.43]

6 My other colleague sent in the following thoughts: 1. [sent-10, score-0.216]

7 I [my colleague who has worked in this area] thought that the result of the coaching studies was that they did not show significant improvement when the control was serious self-study (e. [sent-11, score-0.468]

8 , going through ’10 Real SATs,’ a relatively inexpensive publication available from the College Board. [sent-13, score-0.208]

9 I can’t put my fingers on exact studies, so I could be quoting myth or misquoting the actual work. [sent-15, score-0.265]

10 The approach I [my colleague] has always favored is to set the cut point for the test scores (SAT, GRE) relatively low (although not so low that you are admitting people who are unprepared); big enough that you get half again as many applicants as you have vacancies. [sent-17, score-1.014]

11 Then look at other factors in statements and background to create the incoming class. [sent-18, score-0.084]

12 One of the roles that the SAT plays is in helping to “equate” the high school grades which reflect local grading practices. [sent-22, score-0.181]

13 According to the famous 8-schools study (reproduced in chapter 5 of BDA), the effect of coaching is less than 10 points. [sent-24, score-0.347]

14 And, indeed, I’ve heard that the effect of coaching is about the same as the effect of spending X hours studying the material. [sent-26, score-0.442]

15 Setting too high a cut point on GRE can rule out some potentially excellent applicants. [sent-30, score-0.35]

16 That’s why I suggested adjusting the SAT rather than abandoning it. [sent-33, score-0.24]


similar blogs computed by tfidf model

tfidf for this blog:

wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)

[('sat', 0.294), ('coaching', 0.252), ('colleague', 0.216), ('gre', 0.213), ('cut', 0.177), ('harvard', 0.17), ('adjusting', 0.147), ('applicants', 0.147), ('howard', 0.145), ('low', 0.129), ('highest', 0.118), ('relatively', 0.115), ('score', 0.113), ('administrations', 0.107), ('hs', 0.107), ('sats', 0.107), ('unprepared', 0.107), ('fingers', 0.101), ('pick', 0.1), ('equate', 0.096), ('high', 0.095), ('effect', 0.095), ('abandoning', 0.093), ('inexpensive', 0.093), ('dice', 0.09), ('seniors', 0.09), ('reproduced', 0.088), ('toss', 0.088), ('grading', 0.086), ('prejudice', 0.086), ('favored', 0.084), ('kaplan', 0.084), ('discriminate', 0.084), ('incoming', 0.084), ('myth', 0.084), ('hansen', 0.081), ('hilarious', 0.08), ('quoting', 0.08), ('enough', 0.079), ('cold', 0.078), ('visiting', 0.078), ('wainer', 0.078), ('point', 0.078), ('admitting', 0.076), ('parent', 0.075), ('princeton', 0.075), ('director', 0.074), ('discrimination', 0.074), ('diversity', 0.074), ('deciding', 0.074)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 1.0000001 94 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-SAT stories

Introduction: I received a bunch of interesting comments on my blog on adjusting SAT scores. Below I have a long comment from a colleague with experience in the field. But first, this hilarious (from a statistical perspective) story from Howard Wainer: Some years ago when we were visiting Harvard [as a parent of a potential student, not in Howard's role as educational researcher], an admissions director said two things of relevance (i) the SAT hasn’t got enough ‘top’ for Harvard — it doesn’t discriminate well enough at the high end. To prove this she said (ii) that Harvard had more than 1500 ‘perfect 1600s’ apply. Some were rejected. I mentioned that there were only about 750 1600s from HS seniors in the US — about 400 had 1600 in their junior year (and obviously didn’t retake) and about 350 from their senior year. So, I concluded, she must be mistaken. Then I found out that they allowed applicants to pick and choose their highest SAT-V score and their highest SAT-M score from separate adm

2 0.2087969 93 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-My proposal for making college admissions fairer

Introduction: After reading the Rewarding Strivers book , I had some thoughts about how to make the college admissions system more fair to students from varying socioeconomic backgrounds. Instead of boosting up the disadvantaged students, why not pull down the advantaged students? Here’s the idea. Disadvantaged students are defined typically not by a bad thing that they have, but rather by good things that they don’t have: financial resources, a high-quality education, and so forth. In contrast, advantaged students get all sorts of freebies. So here are my suggestions: 1. All high school grades on a 4-point scale (A=4, B=3, etc). No more of this 5-points-for-an-A-in-an-AP course, which gives the ridiculous outcomes of kids graduating with a 4.3 average, not so fair to kids in schools that don’t offer a lot of AP classes. 2. Subtract points for taking the SAT multiple times. A simple rule would be: You can use your highest SAT score, but you lose 50 points for every other time

3 0.17068096 95 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-“Rewarding Strivers: Helping Low-Income Students Succeed in College”

Introduction: Several years ago, I heard about a project at the Educational Testing Service to identify “strivers”: students from disadvantaged backgrounds who did unexpectedly well on the SAT (the college admissions exam formerly known as the “Scholastic Aptitude Test” but apparently now just “the SAT,” in the same way that Exxon is just “Exxon” and that Harry Truman’s middle name is just “S”), at least 200 points above a predicted score based on demographic and neighborhood information. My ETS colleague and I agreed that this was a silly idea: From a statistical point of view, if student A is expected ahead of time to do better than student B, and then they get identical test scores, then you’d expect student A (the non-”striver”) to do better than student B (the “striver”) later on. Just basic statistics: if a student does much better than expected, then probably some of that improvement is noise. The idea of identifying these “strivers” seemed misguided and not the best use of the SAT.

4 0.14157048 598 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-03-Is Harvard hurting poor kids by cutting tuition for the upper middle class?

Introduction: Timothy Noah reports : At the end of 2007, Harvard announced that it would limit tuition to no more than 10 percent of family income for families earning up to $180,000. (It also eliminated all loans, following a trail blazed by Princeton, and stopped including home equity in its calculations of family wealth.) Yale saw and raised to $200,000, and other wealthy colleges weighed in with variations. Noah argues that this is a bad thing because it encourages other colleges to give tuition breaks to families with six-figure incomes, thus sucking up money that could otherwise go to reduce tuition for lower-income students. For example: Roger Lehecka, a former dean of students at Columbia, and Andrew Delbanco, director of American studies there, wrote in the New York Times that Harvard’s initiative was “good news for students at Harvard or Yale” but “bad news” for everyone else. “The problem,” they explained, “is that most colleges will feel compelled to follow Harvard and Yale’s

5 0.13896498 968 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-21-Could I use a statistics coach?

Introduction: In a thought-provoking article subtitled “Top athletes and singers have coaches. Should you?,” surgeon/journalist Atul Gawande describes how, even after eight years and more than two thousand operations, he benefited from coaching (from a retired surgeon), just as pro athletes and accomplished musicians do. He then talks about proposals to institute coaching for teachers to help them perform better. This all makes sense to me—except that I’m a little worried about expansion of the teacher coaching program. I can imagine it could work pretty well for teachers who are motivated to be coached—for example, I think I would get a lot out of it—but I’m afraid that if teacher coaching became a big business, it would get taken over by McKinsey-style scam artists. But could I use a coach? First, let me get rid of the easy questions. 1. Yes, I could use a squash coach. I enjoy squash and play when I can, but I’m terrible at it. I’m sure a coach would help. On the other hand, I’m h

6 0.11836708 1595 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-28-Should Harvard start admitting kids at random?

7 0.1142683 1507 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-22-Grade inflation: why weren’t the instructors all giving all A’s already??

8 0.11338206 2270 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-28-Creating a Lenin-style democracy

9 0.10454577 1972 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-07-When you’re planning on fitting a model, build up to it by fitting simpler models first. Then, once you have a model you like, check the hell out of it

10 0.10147277 1265 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-15-Progress in U.S. education; also, a discussion of what it takes to hit the op-ed pages

11 0.096051991 825 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-27-Grade inflation: why weren’t the instructors all giving all A’s already??

12 0.095612109 529 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-21-“City Opens Inquiry on Grading Practices at a Top-Scoring Bronx School”

13 0.094999015 578 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-17-Credentialism, elite employment, and career aspirations

14 0.092645913 2323 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-07-Cause he thinks he’s so-phisticated

15 0.092593431 1730 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-20-Unz on Unz

16 0.091485634 1625 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-15-“I coach the jumpers here at Boise State . . .”

17 0.090837851 1688 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-22-That claim that students whose parents pay for more of college get worse grades

18 0.08920192 1980 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-13-Test scores and grades predict job performance (but maybe not at Google)

19 0.081930615 740 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-01-The “cushy life” of a University of Illinois sociology professor

20 0.081328839 1435 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-30-Retracted articles and unethical behavior in economics journals?


similar blogs computed by lsi model

lsi for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(0, 0.174), (1, -0.054), (2, 0.007), (3, -0.056), (4, 0.02), (5, 0.035), (6, 0.058), (7, 0.062), (8, -0.014), (9, -0.008), (10, -0.028), (11, 0.104), (12, 0.002), (13, 0.003), (14, 0.003), (15, 0.012), (16, 0.047), (17, 0.003), (18, -0.02), (19, 0.013), (20, -0.041), (21, 0.041), (22, 0.002), (23, -0.005), (24, 0.036), (25, -0.014), (26, 0.006), (27, 0.014), (28, -0.027), (29, 0.009), (30, -0.042), (31, 0.006), (32, 0.045), (33, 0.045), (34, -0.002), (35, 0.017), (36, 0.019), (37, -0.012), (38, 0.019), (39, 0.006), (40, -0.019), (41, 0.004), (42, 0.002), (43, 0.01), (44, 0.007), (45, -0.053), (46, -0.001), (47, -0.009), (48, -0.02), (49, 0.013)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.95302576 94 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-SAT stories

Introduction: I received a bunch of interesting comments on my blog on adjusting SAT scores. Below I have a long comment from a colleague with experience in the field. But first, this hilarious (from a statistical perspective) story from Howard Wainer: Some years ago when we were visiting Harvard [as a parent of a potential student, not in Howard's role as educational researcher], an admissions director said two things of relevance (i) the SAT hasn’t got enough ‘top’ for Harvard — it doesn’t discriminate well enough at the high end. To prove this she said (ii) that Harvard had more than 1500 ‘perfect 1600s’ apply. Some were rejected. I mentioned that there were only about 750 1600s from HS seniors in the US — about 400 had 1600 in their junior year (and obviously didn’t retake) and about 350 from their senior year. So, I concluded, she must be mistaken. Then I found out that they allowed applicants to pick and choose their highest SAT-V score and their highest SAT-M score from separate adm

2 0.84124994 95 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-“Rewarding Strivers: Helping Low-Income Students Succeed in College”

Introduction: Several years ago, I heard about a project at the Educational Testing Service to identify “strivers”: students from disadvantaged backgrounds who did unexpectedly well on the SAT (the college admissions exam formerly known as the “Scholastic Aptitude Test” but apparently now just “the SAT,” in the same way that Exxon is just “Exxon” and that Harry Truman’s middle name is just “S”), at least 200 points above a predicted score based on demographic and neighborhood information. My ETS colleague and I agreed that this was a silly idea: From a statistical point of view, if student A is expected ahead of time to do better than student B, and then they get identical test scores, then you’d expect student A (the non-”striver”) to do better than student B (the “striver”) later on. Just basic statistics: if a student does much better than expected, then probably some of that improvement is noise. The idea of identifying these “strivers” seemed misguided and not the best use of the SAT.

3 0.83899045 93 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-My proposal for making college admissions fairer

Introduction: After reading the Rewarding Strivers book , I had some thoughts about how to make the college admissions system more fair to students from varying socioeconomic backgrounds. Instead of boosting up the disadvantaged students, why not pull down the advantaged students? Here’s the idea. Disadvantaged students are defined typically not by a bad thing that they have, but rather by good things that they don’t have: financial resources, a high-quality education, and so forth. In contrast, advantaged students get all sorts of freebies. So here are my suggestions: 1. All high school grades on a 4-point scale (A=4, B=3, etc). No more of this 5-points-for-an-A-in-an-AP course, which gives the ridiculous outcomes of kids graduating with a 4.3 average, not so fair to kids in schools that don’t offer a lot of AP classes. 2. Subtract points for taking the SAT multiple times. A simple rule would be: You can use your highest SAT score, but you lose 50 points for every other time

4 0.81861621 1688 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-22-That claim that students whose parents pay for more of college get worse grades

Introduction: Theodore Vasiloudis writes: I came upon this article by Laura Hamilton, an assistant professor in the University of California at Merced, that claims that “The more money that parents provide for higher education, the lower the grades their children earn.” I can’t help but feel that there something wrong with the basis of the study or a confounding factor causing this apparent correlation, and since you often comment on studies on your blog I thought you might find this study interesting. My reply: I have to admit that the description above made me suspicious of the study before I even looked at it. On first thought, I’d expect the effect of parent’s financial contributions to be positive (as they free the student from the need to get a job during college), but not negative. Hamilton argues that “parental investments create a disincentive for student achievement,” which may be—but I’m generally suspicious of arguments in which the rebound is bigger than the main effect.

5 0.81804973 1265 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-15-Progress in U.S. education; also, a discussion of what it takes to hit the op-ed pages

Introduction: Howard Wainer writes : When we focus only on the differences between groups, we too easily lose track of the big picture. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the current public discussions of the size of the gap in test scores that is observed between racial groups. It has been noted that in New Jersey the gap between the average scores of white and black students on the well-developed scale of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has shrunk by only about 25 percent over the past two decades. The conclusion drawn was that even though the change is in the right direction, it is far too slow. But focusing on the difference blinds us to what has been a remarkable success in education over the past 20 years. Although the direction and size of student improvements are considered across many subject areas and many age groups, I will describe just one — 4th grade mathematics. . . . there have been steep gains for both racial groups over this period (somewhat steeper g

6 0.80679065 326 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-07-Peer pressure, selection, and educational reform

7 0.80635756 718 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-18-Should kids be able to bring their own lunches to school?

8 0.76041538 71 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-07-Pay for an A?

9 0.74022412 825 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-27-Grade inflation: why weren’t the instructors all giving all A’s already??

10 0.73656565 1507 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-22-Grade inflation: why weren’t the instructors all giving all A’s already??

11 0.7343421 2270 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-28-Creating a Lenin-style democracy

12 0.72755319 1350 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-28-Value-added assessment: What went wrong?

13 0.72438449 1803 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-14-Why girls do better in school

14 0.72340125 1657 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-06-Lee Nguyen Tran Kim Song Shimazaki

15 0.72243714 484 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-24-Foreign language skills as an intrinsic good; also, beware the tyranny of measurement

16 0.72092336 853 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-14-Preferential admissions for children of elite colleges

17 0.72033095 226 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-23-More on those L.A. Times estimates of teacher effectiveness

18 0.71071929 1910 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-22-Struggles over the criticism of the “cannabis users and IQ change” paper

19 0.71052706 732 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-26-What Do We Learn from Narrow Randomized Studies?

20 0.70887208 561 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-06-Poverty, educational performance – and can be done about it


similar blogs computed by lda model

lda for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(9, 0.026), (15, 0.037), (16, 0.114), (20, 0.018), (21, 0.012), (24, 0.112), (36, 0.018), (47, 0.049), (54, 0.119), (77, 0.013), (86, 0.023), (88, 0.013), (89, 0.017), (95, 0.031), (99, 0.266)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.95266199 94 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-SAT stories

Introduction: I received a bunch of interesting comments on my blog on adjusting SAT scores. Below I have a long comment from a colleague with experience in the field. But first, this hilarious (from a statistical perspective) story from Howard Wainer: Some years ago when we were visiting Harvard [as a parent of a potential student, not in Howard's role as educational researcher], an admissions director said two things of relevance (i) the SAT hasn’t got enough ‘top’ for Harvard — it doesn’t discriminate well enough at the high end. To prove this she said (ii) that Harvard had more than 1500 ‘perfect 1600s’ apply. Some were rejected. I mentioned that there were only about 750 1600s from HS seniors in the US — about 400 had 1600 in their junior year (and obviously didn’t retake) and about 350 from their senior year. So, I concluded, she must be mistaken. Then I found out that they allowed applicants to pick and choose their highest SAT-V score and their highest SAT-M score from separate adm

2 0.95042711 322 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-06-More on the differences between drugs and medical devices

Introduction: Someone who works in statistics in the pharmaceutical industry (but prefers to remain anonymous) sent me this update to our discussion on the differences between approvals of drugs and medical devices: The ‘substantial equivalence’ threshold is a very outdated. Basically the FDA has to follow federal law and the law is antiquated and leads to two extraordinarily different paths for device approval. You could have a very simple but first-in-kind device with an easy to understand physiological mechanism of action (e.g. the FDA approved a simple tiny stent that would relieve pressure from a glaucoma patient’s eye this summer). This device would require a standard (likely controlled) trial at the one-sided 0.025 level. Even after the trial it would likely go to a panel where outside experts (e.g.practicing & academic MDs and statisticians) hear evidence from the company and FDA and vote on its safety and efficacy. FDA would then rule, consider the panel’s vote, on whether to appro

3 0.94206214 615 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-16-Chess vs. checkers

Introduction: Mark Palko writes : Chess derives most of its complexity through differentiated pieces; with checkers the complexity comes from the interaction between pieces. The result is a series of elegant graph problems where the viable paths change with each move of your opponent. To draw an analogy with chess, imagine if moving your knight could allow your opponent’s bishop to move like a rook. Add to that the potential for traps and manipulation that come with forced capture and you have one of the most remarkable games of all time. . . . It’s not unusual to hear masters of both chess and checkers (draughts) to admit that they prefer the latter. So why does chess get all the respect? Why do you never see a criminal mastermind or a Bond villain playing in a checkers tournament? Part of the problem is that we learn the game as children so we tend to think of it as a children’s game. We focus on how simple the rules are and miss how much complexity and subtlety you can get out of those ru

4 0.93728483 358 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-When Kerry Met Sally: Politics and Perceptions in the Demand for Movies

Introduction: Jason Roos sends along this article : On election days many of us see a colorful map of the U.S. where each tiny county has a color on the continuum between red and blue. So far we have not used such data to improve the effectiveness of marketing models. In this study, we show that we should. We demonstrate the usefulness of political data via an interesting application–the demand for movies. Using boxoffice data from 25 counties in the U.S. Midwest (21 quarters between 2000 and 2005) we show that by including political data one can improve out-of-sample predictions significantly. Specifically, we estimate the improvement in forecasts due to the addition of political data to be around $43 million per year for the entire U.S. theatrical market. Furthermore, when it comes to movies we depart from previous work in another way. While previous studies have relied on pre-determined movie genres, we estimate perceived movie attributes in a latent space and formulate viewers’ tastes as

5 0.93341172 1889 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-08-Using trends in R-squared to measure progress in criminology??

Introduction: Torbjørn Skardhamar writes: I am a sociologist/criminologist working at Statistics Norway. As I am not a trained statistician, I find myself sometimes in need to check basic statistical concepts. Recently, I came across an article which I found a bit strange, but I needed to check up on my statistical understanding of a very basic concept: the r-squared. When doing so, I realized that this was also an interesting case of research ethics. Given your interest in research ethics, I though this might be interesting to you. Here’s the mentioned article, by Weisburd and Piquero, is attached. What they do is to analyzed reported results from all articles published in the highest ranking criminological journal since 1968 through 2005 to determine whether there are any progress in the field of criminology. Their approach is basically to calculate the average r-square from linear models in published articles. For example, they state that “variance explained provides one way to assess

6 0.93108237 1676 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-16-Detecting cheating in chess

7 0.92787349 1938 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-14-Learning how to speak

8 0.92298305 839 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-To commenters who are trying to sell something

9 0.91745198 1083 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-26-The quals and the quants

10 0.91635793 1473 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-28-Turing chess run update

11 0.91385436 2121 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-02-Should personal genetic testing be regulated? Battle of the blogroll

12 0.91359818 1656 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-05-Understanding regression models and regression coefficients

13 0.9131543 1721 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-13-A must-read paper on statistical analysis of experimental data

14 0.91130561 2137 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-17-Replication backlash

15 0.90950674 1729 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-20-My beef with Brooks: the alternative to “good statistics” is not “no statistics,” it’s “bad statistics”

16 0.90858138 1105 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-08-Econ debate about prices at a fancy restaurant

17 0.90829921 1878 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-31-How to fix the tabloids? Toward replicable social science research

18 0.90759945 2248 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-15-Problematic interpretations of confidence intervals

19 0.90751767 982 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-30-“There’s at least as much as an 80 percent chance . . .”

20 0.9073602 716 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-17-Is the internet causing half the rapes in Norway? I wanna see the scatterplot.