This is another milestone on the road to ideological capture by our scientific institutions.
by Leslie Eastman
When my son was preparing for college applications, the only standardized test he wanted to use was the ACT. It covers four academic skill areas: English, mathematics, reading and scientific reasoning.
As many of you know, my physics-oriented son thinks he will do well on the scientific reasoning section. He excelled and became a graduate of the United States Air Force Academy, where he served as a physicist.
Scientific reasoning is important because it helps distinguish fact from fiction and allows for informed policy to be formulated based on facts and reasons.
Unfortunately, the ACT organization that administers the test has found that American students are not gaining enough science knowledge in their academic experiences, so the test is now optional.
In fact, the entire test has been simplified.
The science portion of the ACT is no longer required. When registering for the exam, students can choose to take the science portion, such as the writing portion.
The composite score will now be the average of the English, reading and math sections.
Part of the decision was the ACT's desire to be more consistent with other standardized tests. For example, the SAT does not have a science section. Another factor in the decision-making process is student input.
“They've gotten a lot of feedback from students, test takers, about the difficulties they're having on the ACT and questions that don't require the science section,” said Laura Clark, the Rankin County School District's assessment coordinator.
Clark served on the ACT Regional Advisory Committee.
Moreover, the overall test time will also be shortened. The ACT has cut questions from every required section, for a total of 44 questions.
Passages in the Reading and English sections have been shortened to give students more time to focus on the questions.
This step is just another milestone on the road to the complete ideological capture of our scientific institutions. Several recent legal rebellion articles highlight the unintended and potentially damaging consequences of this ideological capture, including:
This trend continues. In City Magazine, contributing editor John Tierney reflects on how a preference for DEI dogma over scientific inquiry is becoming increasingly common on campuses. Many of his examples are disturbing, especially when they drive clear-thinking people out of science.
Other psychologists, frustrated by journals' growing reluctance to publish anything that offends progressives, have been quietly advising their best students to avoid such politicized subjects altogether, especially male students hoping to become professors.
… As today’s young professors gain seniority and hire colleagues who share their views and fit into their preferred identity groups, there will be fewer talented scientists left to solve difficult problems and more scientists determined to prevent anyone from trying .
I'm so happy that my son can do science, which he loves. I hope others who follow him will do the same. I hope this trend away from scientific rigor and toward social justice metrics can be reversed.
The Legal Insurrection team has done a great job, but there is still much more to do.
Relevant
