SAT Math Score Vs. Annual Income

Right out of the box, there's a very close correlation between incomes by profession, and SAT math scores of those who major in those professions.  Without economics majors, who appear to be paid about $27,000 more (almost double) than what their SAT scores indicate that they ought to  be paid, the Pearson Coefficient is 0.7674 (and 0.5 with economics majors included).  Once adjusted to achieve linearity with SAT Math scores (a Pearson Coefficient of 0.9984), it would appear that not only are economists overpaid by $27,000, but that computer technicians are overpaid by $9,700, educators and sociologists are overpaid by $7,100, and humanities/writers are overpaid by $1,000.  Conversely, physicists are UNDERPAID by $5,500, engineers by $1,200, and biologists by $700.

Why are our teachers paid so much, what extra value have they contributed to the education of our children by being paid so much, what role did this play in our scoring DEAD LAST in TIMSS, and why do the highest scoring nations and states spend one fourth to one tenth per student than that of the lowest scoring states and nations?  As a percent of GDP, public expenditures for education in Japan, whose 8th graders now score more than 100 TIMSS math points higher than our 8th graders, are about half of ours (3% vs. 5%), whereas in 1959 we spent less than Japan.  In constant 2009 US dollars, we now spend FOUR TIMES as much per student ($10,441 vs. $2,560), and THIRTY TIMES as much in actual dollars ($10,441 vs $350), than we did in 1959, when SAT scores were 130 points higher.  The cost per student in government schools has historically been more than two thirds lower (about $2,900 today) but they always have produced students who score from 0.5 to 1.0 standard deviations higher.  The state which spends the most per student for education (even more than Washington, DC) New Jersey, also scores more than 200 SAT points lower than states like Utah who spend one third as much ($13,338 vs. $4,991).

Paying 2 million teachers $7,100 more than they're worth costs us $14.2 billion annually.  That WOULD be a good investment if our teachers scored in the range of Korean or Japanese or Shanghai teachers rather than social workers.  What we SHOULD do is reduce the cost of education to its level in 1959 AND hire teachers who are at least as competent as teachers were then.
Not only would this save 2% of GDP, or $280 billion per year, but it also might enable us to compete once again with countries like Portugal and Greece.  To compete again with Germany and Japan will NEVER happen.

Predicting Incomes With Standardized Test Scores

By race and sex:

	Incomes increase $146 per year for each 1 point increase in GRE Quantitative scores.
	Incomes increase $187 per year for each 1 point increase in SAT Math Scores.
	Incomes increase $600 per year for each 1 point increase in NAEP Math Scores.
	Incomes increase $6,667 per year for each 1 point increase in ACT Composite Scores.
	Additional graphs here

The following is from http://home.att.net/~dysgenics/TRC.htm

In just this one analysis therefore, the closing gap between Whites and Blacks is shown to be meaningless because of confounding effects, and for that reason the results are without any merit at all. And in a vindication of The Bell Curve that we are seeing more and more of in academic journals and books, Hauser states, "In one important respect, Herrnstein and Murray were surely right: It is most dangerous to project trend lines unthinkingly. Yet another set of NAEP assessments -- for 1992 -- became available after The Bell Curve went to press, and these data appear to confirm that the trend toward convergence in Black and White test scores was reversed after 1986-1988. For example, Figure 1 shows trends in the average (mean) NAEP scores of Blacks and Whites at age 13 in reading, science, and mathematics. The years of greatest convergence are not entirely clear because there are no reading scores for 1986 and no science or math scores for 1988. It does appear that sometime in the middle to late 1980s, the convergent trend ended, and Black-White gaps returned to levels of the early 1980s."

In summary then the following conditions led to a false indication that the intelligence gap between Blacks and Whites was closing when the government changed important programs as follows:

-- Educational expenditures went up much faster for Black students than for all students being tested.

-- Back to basics programs emphasized "teaching to the test" to improve scores so that Black students could do better on the standardized exams.

-- An end to social promotions increased absenteeism and the drop-out rate, so that these marginal or low intelligence Blacks were no longer tested and included in the averages.

-- More students were enrolled into special education programs (slow learners) which was dominated by Blacks and these students also were not included in the NAEP test score results.

Finally, Ceci, Rosenblum and Kumpf state, "THE ESTABLISHED FACTS: There is no dispute among psychometric researchers that Whites outscore Blacks on IQ tests as well as on standardized achievement tests. The gap most commonly reported is approximately 1 SD. (On the most widely used individual IQ tests, this translates into a 15- to 16-point gap between Blacks and Whites; Hispanics fall midway between these groups, and Asian Americans score about 3 points, on average, higher than Whites.) Racial and ethnic gaps in IQ and achievement tests scores have existed throughout this century; for example, IQ differences between Blacks and Whites were evident on the first Stanford -- Binet IQ test normed in 1932. Even earlier signs of a racial gap of approximately 1 SD were apparent on the Army Alpha tests administered to recruits during World War 1. These facts are not in dispute among researchers, although their interpretation is open to argument."

Copyright @ 2010 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party