That's an interesting point. It's always funny to me when they come out with these statistics and studies. I have NEVER participated in one of these studies and these numbers and theories are being dispersed about ME!!

Why do you think statistics should reflect you specifically? LOL!

If anyone on this board has had experience with census data, or any other data for that matter, please stand up.

No, they aren't.

Anyone familiar with social science quantitative research methodology understands that they are using nationally representative samples to generalize to the general population. This does not mean they are trying to account for each and every black woman and white woman (i.e. they aren't necessarily talking about YOU or ME). They are simply looking at generalizations based on trends and patterns, across individuals, as reflected in the data.

Please read the first two pages of this thread.

Well... I do... I filled out my census data in 2000. So technically, I am accounted for ... literally.
And FYI, unlike most sociological methodological research, the census actually does attempt to account for everyone. In the constitution it says that every ten years the government is supposed to account for everybody, because that is how they decide how many representatives to give each state in congress. They literally send out thousands of people door to door to try to get every person in America to fill out a survey. A census person was posted at my dorm with a survey and a number 2 pencil.
Periodically the census updates their info, between the ten year periods, with information from samples of people. They track all kinds of stuff like income, race, occupation, and education. The info is used by the government for all kinds of stuff, like the GAO uses it to base estimates of the impact of various federal programs.

The data from the statistics/article we're talking about come from the "Census Bureau's annual look at educational achievement in America, pulled from a survey in March 2004." So, this isn't the regular once-a-decade Census data collection.

You pointed out that they update their information, between the decades, from samples of people. There are a number of censuses and surveys that the Bureau does on a semi-regular basis. These "updates" are where the concern for "generalizabilitiy" arise. When I was talking about people with experience with Census data or any data, I wasn't referring to people who participated in the once-a-decade survey.

So, when it comes to research and data releases, it is common for people to see the statistics and wonder "who participates in these studies? They didn't ask ME!" Or, if they see the results of a study THEY participated in, to look at the findings and say "but, this isn't what I reported on MY survey or in MY interview."

Thanks for your post. :)

Ummm it's an average?

Who is using data to suit their own purpose?

Why are there so many accusations flying around?

-Rudey

Well since these data get published and spoken about on news programs and the like and constantly infiltrate the minds of Americans who I interact with on a daily basis who, in turn, approach me with attitudes based on such data, I feel as though the statistics are being dispersed about me.

You sure are angry.

-Rudey

They aren't though, Soror. ;)

For example, Blacks and Hispanics are disproportionately in poverty and educated in poor school systems. This is a statistic of two racial and ethic groups, one of which you claim to be a member of, but this does not mean that YOU are in poverty or were educated in a poor school system.

Smart people will know this doesn't necessarily include YOU. But, I do agree that these statistics can be used to fuel liberal and conservative agendas and the politics (including public opinion) of it all is where there can be a problem.

There's really no way to avoid that unless we want to stop collecting data and doing research. That would leave me without a career (:p) and would mean that we don't have any foundation for social movements, funding, and public policy.

Which is why we need you constantly questioning and testing the bounds and misperceptions of folks on GC... :D

;)

I'm not the only one. I think GC should pay us for our services. ;)