On 14 Mar 2005 20:38:32 -0800, "Hyerdahl"  wrote:

>Actually, when you think about it, all the subjects, INCLUDING MATH,
>require the knowledge of reading and writing.  Thus, to weight the test
>more accurately, language would be, naturally, more important than
>math.

What?? That is the stupidest, and most obvioulsy self-serving
rationalization I've come across in weeks. Who do you expect to
convince with that shallow stupidity?

>> The SAT test is now 1600 points for language (reading and writing
>> parts), and still 800 for math. Accordingly, boys will do worse than
>> girls from now on. Your son, comparing scores with girls, will always
>> come up short.
>
>So don't you think it's a good thing that the test is weighted so as to
>accurately reflect the types of knowledge necessary to perform college
>level work in all those subjects (INCLUDING MATH) that will require
>language?

You're wrong, of course; language is not more important than the
analytical skills in the math section.

>Boys, your day is over

There's your real hatred, you unbalanced bitch.



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/15/05 12:57:06 PM ---