Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Education

snot

(10,740 posts)

10. This should be read as a judgment on all of us, I'm afraid.

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Wed Apr 16, 2014, 10:36 PM

Apr 2014

Just because a kid is poor, shouldn't mean s/he's never encountered "obscure" vocabulary. Libraries are free; and public education and public support for the poor should be sufficient for poor kids to have had access to and an interest in the books that contain "obscure" words.

This is the SAT having to try to compensate for the last several decades of cutting programs to help the poor amid growing poverty due to "trickle down" economic policies and the like.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Revised SAT Won’t Include Obscure Vocabulary Words. [View all] elleng Apr 2014 OP

Darnation! nt greyl Apr 2014 #1

Good. SheilaT Apr 2014 #2

A well-read person, familiar with our human literature, would know these words Demeter Apr 2014 #5

I read a lot. A whole lot. More than most people. SheilaT Apr 2014 #7

But that's why I know a lot of obscure words! Freddie Apr 2014 #3

Hmmm.... Sherman A1 Apr 2014 #4

My blood runs cold Demeter Apr 2014 #6

So, future assignments in English Composition could be as follows... xocet Apr 2014 #8

OMG! Sherman A1 Apr 2014 #9

This should be read as a judgment on all of us, I'm afraid. snot Apr 2014 #10

Hmm, time for Jerry Clower to update "Words We Don't Need" mbperrin Apr 2014 #11