What is the Praxis?

Your opinion of my knowledge of history is based on your opinion of my beliefs.

The actual truth is based on nationally recognized tests. And my Praxis II tests for content knowledge of social studies is outstanding by any measure.

Read it and weap.

"Weap"?

He barely passed on the analytical component for social studies, and brags about that?

Yet content knowledge was a 198 (out of a maximum of 200).

Don't know about Arkansas, but states with high standards place far more emphasis on analysis rather than memorized dates and names. You might do well on Jeopardy, but you do not demonstrate an actual understanding of the subject matter. And your Praxis scores verify this.

What makes you think my analytical score is not considered superb?

Remember the U-2 spyplane?

There are only a few knots between its maximum speed and its stall speed.

It's only a few points above the minimum. That means it's no good. Of course, if you had analytical ability, you wouldn't need to ask the question.

See, that's what I meant by saying you might do well on Jeopardy. Knowing this factual information about the plane is not particularly useful unless you can work out how that impacted Gary Power's flight, and even then, the real story about that incident is something else all together. But you don't know that, because you lack the analysis chops to figure it out.

Can you explain that?

I will.

You may know know what a hammer is when you see one, that is you recognize what the tool is and can identify it. But if you try to use it on a screw then your content knowledge is useless.

I worked at Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse for about four years. And I can tell you there are in fact some screws that are meant to be used with a hammer.

The way gul made it sound, it is as if scoring above the required minimum is no better than making the minimum or below it. Which basically makes the minimum score meaningless anyway.

Am I correct in the assumption that 200 is the max score? If so, your 145 rates a 72.5%, which is barely passing, only exceeding the minimum required by 2.5%. Compare that with your 99% on content knowledge. Another example is how completely you misunderstood Ed's analogy about the hammer.

If you are proud of your content knowledge score, it must be due to the fact that it significantly exceeded the minimum requirement. How can you not see, then, that barely exceeding it is not a meaningful source of prid?

Which is why when I refer to my Praxis score on social studies I refer to my "Content Knowledge". Not "analytical essays".

Have I ever mentioned my score on "analytical essays" before you brought it up just up thread?

And you just proved what @gul was saying, and whenever you try to argue a point you only manage yourself look even more stupid than you already are.

No idea, but if you nearly failed on that portion of the test, then you are in pretty sorry shape as a social scientist.

So you focus on the "analytical essays" and ignore the "content knowledge".

I remember the analytical essays. Two political cartoons that required the test taker write a page about what each of them meant. I wrote one page of analysis on the first. The other IIRC was about the Cold War and seemed extremely straightforward. I had great difficulty filling a page with analysis of it.

Yep, and he keeps digging deeper.

Remembering a fact is one thing, applying that fact to where it has use is knowledge. The 198 indicates that you were able to remember something, the barely passing grade of the analytical essay indicates that you can barely perform above the minimum required to apply what you remember to practical use.

It just proves that gul and others of his ilk are willing to cling to anything they learn about me that is less than flattery rather than give me credit for what I have achieved.

Never saw how a personal distaste for someone you know ONLY through the medium of the internet could go so far.

How many times do they have to explain the same thing before you get it? Everyone else has.

Maybe it has to due with how you've gone on for years about you 198, but neglected to mention that you barely passed what is more important, the ability to analyze the same subject. If you can't do that, then what I said about the hammer remains true, and your claim of "there are in fact some screws that are meant to be used with a hammer" is just another one of your tactics to prove something completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand by trying to dismiss the main point.

No, what I'm saying is that your score proves that you can remember factual data, but when it comes to applying that data you can barely do so at the required levels. So while you know that fact, you struggle to explain the reasons behind that fact.

The two parts of the Praxis testing are weighted the exact same.

Thus the analytical essays are no more important than content knowledge and you know it.

Again with the autism? I thought you said autism no longer exists.

^Changing what someone posted shows your complete and utter ignorance Ed.

I don't think I'd be going out on a limb to suggest that one of the reasons he has so much trouble finding work is that he not only can't explain the terrible analytical score, but when asked about it, he disagrees that it's even an issue.