Braylon Heard did not make it
- Thread starter STOOBIE
- Start date
- Status
OK, I'll try to go slower...
The military does its best to eliminate decision making. They have protocols and training so that decisions are minimized. Thinking for yourself is not going to get you far in the military. The military is therefore a poor example. Any bets on what it takes for entrance into the military academies?
So what might be the reason a person is a "bad test taker"? Your assertion is that it's not a measure of their intelligence nor their ability to handle the stress of the test situation. So what is it then? Some "mystical power" that some people are not blessed with? LOL!
So what exactly does the ACT measure/expose if it's not academic preparedness nor stress tolerance? Do you have data to back up the claim that it is not an indicator of success in school or in life?
See:
While everybody loves to point out the exceptions, the data supports the validity of the ACT for college success. As to success in life, well, first success must be defined and then, well, there will be no need for more of this sentence...
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
You're asserting that nobody has the talent of being a good test-taker? I'm living proof that's inaccurate.
AJ32
Three-Star Recruit
As far as the posts that have suggested poor ACT scores mean that Heard will struggle if/when he gets to UNL, there are tons of academic resources for student-athletes. There are academic counselors, tutors, etc. Never underestimate how much it helps to spend two hours a week with an excellent tutor. I had a high GPA and ACT out of high school, but struggled a lot with Calc II at UNL. Luckily, my roommate is a math major, & was willing to help me out. Even a little bit of help can make a huge difference.
And I'm saying that being a "good test taker" is likely a sign of intelligence. Now if you are claiming that you were good at exams, yet displayed a poor GPA, then I would counter with the idea that you're likely lazy and unfocused, yet intelligent.
There are a million ways to succeed or fail. Brilliant people fail regularly and stupid people succeed wildly. Each with some degree of regularity based on a host of other factors.
There are a million ways to succeed or fail. Brilliant people fail regularly and stupid people succeed wildly. Each with some degree of regularity based on a host of other factors.
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogs
Assistant Coach
The fallacy of standardized tests to determine a person's worth or ability at anything other than how to take the test, is pretty undeniable, in my opinion.
That said, the rules are there for a reason and honestly, they are lenient enough in this case. It is tough for Braylon, and others who can't score high enough but could be perfectly capable, hardworking, intelligent people. But the consequence of that is they'll need to find another path to success instead of being handed the keys to a school like NU for 4 years. Of course in Braylon's case, he still has a chance to make it here eventually, but you get the point.
That said, the rules are there for a reason and honestly, they are lenient enough in this case. It is tough for Braylon, and others who can't score high enough but could be perfectly capable, hardworking, intelligent people. But the consequence of that is they'll need to find another path to success instead of being handed the keys to a school like NU for 4 years. Of course in Braylon's case, he still has a chance to make it here eventually, but you get the point.
Standardized tests suck. They are biased against different cultures and those cultures' respective vernacular language. They also drain all of the creativity from teaching and learning by enforcing a strict set of values and principles that may or may not be relevant to what students actually should be learning. Good test-takers are sometimes nothing more than good guessers, since that's part of taking tests, and standardized tests usually measure shallow levels of comprehension. They don't ask, "Describe in detail the series of events that led to the Civil War." Instead they ask, "When did the Civil War begin? A. 1492 B. 1776 C. 1861 D. 1941."
In that regard, I have met many people who excel at the former. They're good with cause and effect, and they think logically, and they are good with stories. But they struggle with memorization, and as a result sometimes struggle with standardized tests. On the other hand, there are people who couldn't even begin to tell you a story that had any real meaning about our nation's history, but by god they know what year the Civil War started. Those people either understand how tests work, or simply have an easier time remembering dates and names as opposed to remembering concepts, or stories with deeper meanings.
I have not met a single good teacher who thinks standardized tests are in any way, shape or form helpful to our educational system in this country. There aren't very many decisions in life that are simply "multiple choice," where there's one right answer and three wrong answers. That's just not how the world works.
In that regard, I have met many people who excel at the former. They're good with cause and effect, and they think logically, and they are good with stories. But they struggle with memorization, and as a result sometimes struggle with standardized tests. On the other hand, there are people who couldn't even begin to tell you a story that had any real meaning about our nation's history, but by god they know what year the Civil War started. Those people either understand how tests work, or simply have an easier time remembering dates and names as opposed to remembering concepts, or stories with deeper meanings.
I have not met a single good teacher who thinks standardized tests are in any way, shape or form helpful to our educational system in this country. There aren't very many decisions in life that are simply "multiple choice," where there's one right answer and three wrong answers. That's just not how the world works.
Last edited by a moderator:
redblooded
Special Teams Player
Good because trying to decipher what you said before... Well, I had to lump together two posts to try and find some sense that there was actual meaning behind it and that still was very very iffy.
I know what it takes for the military academies, its relatively high (and by that I mean the mid 20s ACT). Those are the people supposed to lead troops and all. That's not was I was contemplating and you know it. Academy requirements are an easy thing to find. Hell I've toured two of the academies in person before college and even googled it AGAIN before I made that assertion which you quoted... Welcome to the internet, where we research what we say before we say it so we don't look like morons.
Most recruits don't end up in an academy, and well are you kidding me? You think some kid on a football field carrying a ball has more decision making then some 18 year old in the military? :rollin
As for me. Unfortunately I don't have the eyesight to be a fighter pilot (I'm still dreaming about it though (I'd be good, I have 3d spacial awareness second to only fatal1ty and a very few select pc gamers)) the air force academy at Colorado springs was my dream. However your laughable attempt to turn this around failed... Lets see what is next...
Here is your problem then, and you quoted it yourself. You are making assumptions based on the test score statistics. Do you know this kid personally? no, you dont. My test score would have told you I'd have excelled at UNL, maybe even been a band member ;P. Knapplc's would have done the same. He flunked out of UNL and I droppeed out of MCC after we got our scores. and I am betting his was higher then mine. Are we relaying anecdotes? yes. Is that any worse then relaying statistics as some sort of gospel? no.
I graduated (and I am going to break knapplc's rule here about discussing GPA or ACT scores) with just barely over ONE HALF of MR. Heard's gpa through highscool. (I was accepted to UNL too, heh, so you can all just take a minute to imagine how that reflects on your degree... or future degree right now).
I was a strait D student doing just what I could to get the grades that would get me out of the hell-hole I called high-school. Aside from about 4 teachers classes in HS... I didn't touch homework for 3 and 1/2 years. However I knew more then... dare I say (YOU) 307husker, and 95+% of your classmates... Since you are the one offended and if you don't believe that well...
Those statistics you were so eager to point out before regarding the ACT says I did.
I was wrong. Those tests I took 12-15 years ago were right. Just who knew I'd be using that score to brag I was a intellectual bad-a$$ against some dude on a message board 12 years later. First time that score was actually useful, well, that is excepting the devaluation of the degrees anyone got from schools I was accepted to out of high-school.
Good counterargument. The data does support it.
Edit: I see red...
However none, absolutely none of the arguments about the ACT and our scores changes the fact that Braylon Heard is taking the test, to the best of his ability... As many times as he can to qualify to get into Nebraska because that is where he wants to go.
Rather then a kudos for getting the score he was shooting for or a "better luck in February" this is what springs up.
Last edited by a moderator:
Apathy
All-American
LOL I know! Reading this whole thread makes me want to go take the ACT all over again.
krill
Special Teams Player
UNL dropped a required test score for entrance some time ago. I'm not sure if there ever was one in the first place but now it's test score, GPA or class rank.
So what we're debating here is the NCAA requirement for student athletes. It doesn't seem entirely fair to individuals like Braylon that are so close, but without the test score requirement imagine all the tricks schools could use to grease star athletes in. The whole point is to establish a semblance of an academic standard so there's not a race to the bottom that puts schools with high academic standards at a huge disadvantage.
Also, it's not like 2 years at juco is a complete waste. There are good juco football programs that develop players so they can make full use of their eligibility after transferring while also better preparing them for school.
So what we're debating here is the NCAA requirement for student athletes. It doesn't seem entirely fair to individuals like Braylon that are so close, but without the test score requirement imagine all the tricks schools could use to grease star athletes in. The whole point is to establish a semblance of an academic standard so there's not a race to the bottom that puts schools with high academic standards at a huge disadvantage.
Also, it's not like 2 years at juco is a complete waste. There are good juco football programs that develop players so they can make full use of their eligibility after transferring while also better preparing them for school.
mmmtodd
All-Conference
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
Out of curiosity, what did you expect from a thread like this? After, "Heard didn't make it because of his test scores/That sucks/Hope he makes it by Fall," there isn't much to talk about. A discussion on test scores and the worthiness of the ACT is a natural progression. Sure, "I got a great ACT score" is a little boastful, but it's pretty natural in this kind of thread.
- Status