Truth About Standardized Test Scores


At the 8th grade level, girls in the US score 0.31 standard deviations higher than boys in PISA reading (513 vs. 488). By 12th grade, as measured by SAT verbal, boys have a slight 0.18 standard deviation advantage over girls (420 vs. 438). But after college, the gender gap in verbal skills as measured by GRE verbal (512 vs 484) gives males a 0.28 standard deviation advantage over females, on par with their 0.35 standard deviation advantage on SAT math.

There are 5,940,000 female and 4,861,000 male students in our undergraduate schools, and if the math skills of these girls follows the pattern of the Howard Wainer study, then 2,678,940 girls have math skills equivalent to boys who flunk out of math, 1,799,820 have math skills equivalent to boys who get D's, and 1,455,300 have math skills equivalent to boys who get C's.

None of them have math skills which would qualify them to follow a career in STEMS, while more than half of the 5,940,000 boys who were rejected (or 2,970,000 of them) to make room for these girl students, WOULD have benefited from a career in STEMS.

Why would we as a society do this at a time when high tech careers are so valuable, and so profitable? It's like cutting our nose off to spite our face. f you ever wondered why we can't make our own shoes, much less our own semiconductors and electronics, and instead must go all the way to China to have them made for us, then now you know why.

Math tests simply present mathematical facts to students to measure how well they can solve problems, and cannot be designed to "discriminate against" women, Blacks, Hispanics, nor Asians (particularly Asian men who score higher than the so-called privileged White men). The fact that 51% of college boys can solve
problems ( and thus get A's and B's in college math) which no girls can solve, not even those who get A's in college math, means just that--no American girl can solve problems that at least half of American boys have proven on SAT math tests that they CAN solve. All math problems are representative of how well a citizen can solve problems at school, at work, in science, in politics, and in life.

What's the effect of this invidious discrimination against our boys?  If all of the 5,940,000 boys who had been denied admission to make room for this many girls, had instead been accepted, we would now have 10,801,000 boys in college, and at least half of them, or 5,400,500 boys who CAN solve math problems, would be in our undergraduate schools where they CAN benefit from an undergraduate education. This is 122% more than the current figure of 2,430,500 students who DO understand math.








Out of 838,235 Whites who took SAT math in 2010, none of them scored over 800 and only 27 scored higher than 740 (an average IQ of 143)

Out of 166,064 Asians who took it, 219 scored over 800 and 5 of them would have scored over 841 it that had been possible (an IQ over 153).

Out of 112,254 "white" Hispanics, none of them scored higher than 675 and only 64 scored higher than the average for Asians (an IQ of 121).

Out of 85,761 Mexicans, none of them scored higher than 670 and only 199 scored higher than the average for Asians.

Out of 24,365 Puerto Ricans, none scored higher than 659 and only 66 scored higher than the average for Asians.

Out of 196,961 Blacks, none of them scored higher than 635 and only 52 scored higher than the average for Asians (indicating that 52 American blacks had an IQ higher than 121.

BUT--where the SAT to IQ correlator places an SAT math score of 428 for college bound American Blacks at 98, a correlation with Lynn's IQ of Nations puts it at 76.8. This is consistent with a correlation with the ACT math score for blacks of 17.1 which puts their IQ at 76. AND with PISA math which shows that a PISA score of 311 is equivalent to an IQ of 77 and is in the range of Qatar and Azerbaijan. And with the TIMSS math score for Botswana and India of 356, which puts their IQ at 72. AND with the Beaton Gonzalez correlation between IAEP and NAEP which shows that Jordan (with an IQ of 87) scored 4.7 points higher than DC which was 85% Blacks when they took the test (236.1 vs. 231.4). With each IAEP point equal to 4 IQ points, this is a difference of 19 IQ points, which would put the IQ of DC at 68.

Which is the most accurate? Which is the most believable? Are we to believe that American blacks who murder each other at a rate ten times higher than African blacks, and whose larceny, theft, robbery, and assault at a rate more than ten times higher than African blacks, and who cannot speak American English nearly as well as just about every Black in Africa where the British were, still speak with a perfect British accent, have an IQ two standard deviations higher than African Blacks. Or is it the other way around, and the SAT managed to over-represent the vast "accomplishments" of mentally ill liberals in "educating" Blacks by 2 SD?














Standard deviation, GRE quantitative

Within race
Indian = 0.47 sd
Asian = 0.58 sd
Black = 0.13 sd
Mexican = 0.59 sd
Puerto Rican = 0.50 sd
Hispanic = 0.64 sd
White = 0.68 sd
Other = 0.60 sd
Total = 0.62

Across race
Asian male to Black Female = 2.25 sd
White female to Black Male = 1.11 sd
White male to Black Female = 1.4 sd (verbal)


Within country, by sex
Netherlands = 0.65 sd
Norway = 0.68
US = 0.1 sd
Switzerland = 0.41 sd
South Africa = 0.21
Denmark = 0.65 sd
Iceland = 0.68
Czech Republic = 0.65 (science)

TIMSS Calculus

Within country, by sex
US AP calculus = 0.19 sd
US avg = 0.26
Denmark = 0.33 sd
Lithuania = 0.44 sd
Canada = 0.46 sd
Russia = 0.53
Switzerland = 0.63 sd
Czech Republic = 0.89
Austria = 0.93 sd

Women HATE to be reminded that their smaller brains DO have a significant negative effect on their IQ, across the world, across the races, across the country, from state to state, and from city to city.

Detailed Data Below









In order to explain the huge difference from state to state in SAT Math and Verbal scores, we must break down the scores by race, sex, and religion.  To do this we must make the following adjustments to the *official* percentage of Catholics per state reported by the Catholic church.  Once we have achieved an r-squared close to 1.0 we can then estimate what the verbal and math scores for Catholics and Protestants MUST be in order to explain the huge state to state gaps.













In other words, where the gap in total SAT math and verbal scores from the highest scoring state to the lowest scoring state appears to be in the range of 150 points, the only explanation for why this is so is that the gap between Catholics and Protestants in math scores is 236, and in verbal scores 235, for a total gap of a whopping 472 SAT points.

There are of course other factors besides religious teachings.  For instance, there is much publicity about how the lowest scoring states also have a high percentage of students taking the test, and the highest scoring states have a fewer percentage.  While this is a factor, correlation is low enough that it is at best 25% of the reason, plus it cannot always be true that only the top scoring students take the test in high scoring states, while only low scoring students take it in low scoring states.









SAT Math Scores Increase 3 Points For Each One Percent Reduction in Catholics 


SAT Verbal Scores Increase 3 Points For Each One Percent Reduction in Catholics  

Are Catholic Population Figures from the Catholic Church Reliable? 





Rhode Island

% Catholic



% Protestant



Whites SAT Math



Whites SAT Verbal



A = SAT Score Catholics

B = SAT score Protestants



0.11 * A + 0.89 * B = 613


0.45 * A + 0.55 * B = 533

A = (613 - .89B)/.11

0.45 * (613 - .89B)/0.11 +.55B = 533

2,507.72 - 3.641B + .55B = 533

3.091B = 1,974.72

B = 638.9

A = (613 - .89 * 638.9)/.11 = 403.4



0.11 * A + 0.89 * B = 592


0.45 * A + 0.55 * B = 512

A = (592 - .89B)/.11

0.45 * (592 - .89B)/0.11 +.55B = 512

2,421.8 - 3.641B + .55B = 512

3.091B = 1,909.8

B = 617.9

A = (592 - .89 * 617.9)/.11 = 382.8























Race/Religion SAT Math
Protestant Whites 648
Catholic Whites 391
Indians 452
Asians 615
Blacks 401
Hispanic 441





Column1 Iowa Rhode Island New York North Dakota
SAT M Whites 613 516 535 610
non-hisp Whites 91.0% 79.3% 62.0% 66.0%
Hispanic 3.8% 11.2% 15.1% 15.1%
Catholics 17.1% 59.2% 37.6% 22.2%
White Catholics 13.3% 48.0% 22.5% 7.1%
White Protestants 77.7% 31.3% 39.5% 58.9%
Cath as pct Whites 14.6% 60.5% 36.3% 10.8%
Prot as pct Whites 85.4% 39.5% 63.7% 89.2%
Protestant Whites 661.3 661.3 635 635
Catholic Whites 421.2 421.2 360 360
Indians 449 480
Asians 661 527 569 638
Blacks 502 403 421 402
Hispanic 521 404 439


horizontal rule

expressyourself.jpg (1388 bytes)

1996 Profile of College-Bound Seniors National Report

Background Information

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:

  1. The test changed so drastically that girls transitioned from scoring 5 points higher than boys to 8 points lower.
  2. Scores between 1960 to 1967, when the vast majority of the plunge in scores occurred, are not reported.
  3. All that "recentering" SAT scores accomplished was to "increase" the scores of nigger girls from 310 to 411.
  4. 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?


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:



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.





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:



Race & Sex TIMSS Math Cranial Capacity cc's

ACT Math

GRE Quanti tative NAEP Math
Asian Boys 640 1,472 24.4 638 289
Caucasian Boys 588 1,416 22.4 586 286
Asian Girls 580 1,358 22.2 572 279
Caucasian Girls 528 1,308 20.0 514 276
Mexican Boys 519 1,365 19.4 517 255
Indian Boys 500 1,317 19.0 525 268
jew boys 478 1,369 18.3 450 245
Mexican Girls 459 1,261 18.4 451 245
jew girls 458 1,269 17.5 448 243
Indian Girls 440 1,217 18.0 462 258
Nigger Boys 247 1,319 17.4 446 247
Nigger Girls 187 1,217 16.4 404 237


Satmfmrace.gif (25395 bytes)

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.

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: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.



wpe1.gif (37748 bytes)




satmfracemath.gif (65953 bytes)

satmfraceverbal.gif (66679 bytes)





























































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%.

wpe1.gif (41016 bytes)


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.

wpe2.gif (30015 bytes)


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



North Dakota








8th Grade TIMSS






SAT Math






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


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..


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.


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.


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

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


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. 

wpe3.gif (38741 bytes)

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.

satmcalnorthdakota.gif (23239 bytes)

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:

naepiaep.gif (27994 bytes)




Between 1965 and 1996 scores on the verbal section of the GRE decreased 57 points, while the scores in some subjects 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.

gre19651996.gif (19067 bytes)

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.




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.

Extraploation of carrefoursagesse Curve

800 150.00000
790 148.00000
780 147.13953
770 145.78641
760 144.43329
750 143.08017
740 141.72705
730 140.37393
720 139.02081
710 137.66769
700 137.00000
690 134.96144
680 133.60832
670 132.25520
660 130.90208
650 129.54896
640 128.19584
630 126.84272
620 125.48960 Protestant
610 124.13647
600 122.78335
590 121.67854 Iowa
580 120.35515
570 119.03176
560 117.70837
550 116.38498
540 115.06158
530 113.73819
520 112.41480
510 111.09141 Rhode Island
500 109.76802 White
490 108.44463 Asian
480 107.12123
470 105.79784
460 104.47445 White Hispanic
450 103.15106 Indian
440 101.82767
430 100.50427 Mexican
420 99.18088
410 97.85749 Puerto Rican
400 96.53410
390 95.21071 Black
380 93.88732 Catholic
370 92.56392
360 91.24053
350 89.91714
340 88.59375
330 87.27036
320 85.94697
310 84.62357
300 83.30018
290 81.97679
280 80.65340
270 79.33001
260 78.00662
250 76.68322
240 75.35983
230 74.03644
220 72.71305
210 71.38966 Jewish
200 70.06627
190 68.74287
180 67.41948
170 66.09609
160 64.77270
150 63.44931
140 62.12591
130 60.80252








At UC Berkeley, where it's called "comprehensive review," the system [read: inviduous sytemic discrimination] 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.


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