Demanding excellence for the many rather than the few is questionable, and academic excellence defined as test success is too narrow¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r1 · q1
Currency · newest study 1962 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 1967: baselines and conditions change
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because a design page cites it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Excellence for all may reduce itself to excellence for the few, as in Europe, and equating excellence with success on college entrance tests is too narrow. → Jenkins 1962

Evidence¶

Jenkins 1962¶

Jenkins, William A. (1962). Time That Is Intolerant. Elementary English. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED030640

q1 · i? · theoretical · r1

Argument in the 'Our Concern with Excellence' section, citing Professor Foshay's question of numbers ("No other nation has asked excellence save for the few. We must have excellence for the many.") and the French tutoring-for-examinations example.

"In earnestness, I must now say that excellence for all may well reduce itself to excellence for the few, as has been the case in Europe for many years."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Typical verbal achievement tests may underestimate students' subject-matter knowledge because of a mismatch between the test's symbolic form and students' symbolic encoding — related
• Universal college-prep coursework did not prepare more students for college: upper-level math credits and four-year college entrance showed no overall gains — related
• Reinstating high-stakes testing to measure learning loss narrows the curriculum and does not benefit long-term achievement — related
• Course grades and GPA predict high school and college outcomes better than standardized test scores or coursework — related