Ferrisjso wrote:I don't need to show evidence of taking a year off detrimental, you just need to respect if people don't want to wait a year , which is very rarely done(which isn't the case here). Still this is not just a me issue many threads have had people who haven't wanted to wait a year and that should be respected and seen a concern not cast aside so people can retake a test that will not inherently get them what they want. If reapplying will get someone a better guaranteed outcome because they applied late and/or were lowballed then the whole reapply/retake advice becomes much more of a no brainier(I've given this advice) but just retaking because some people misled you about how likely a score increase is just doesn't make sense to me.
Also I was thinking of other numbers but those are the raw numbers, it doesn't say how much higher people do on their first and third take, averages are a lot more helpful because it gives us a picture of how much better or worse the general population does.
Actually, since there has been plenty of evidence presented to show that retaking is beneficial (again, refer to the table of numbers you keep ignoring), yes
, you do need to show evidence that taking the year off is detrimental.
And no, the average numbers you're referring to do not give us a better picture of how likely a score increase is on a retake. Let's demonstrate using real-world examples, because you still haven't grasped what the numbers actually mean. We'll take 10 potential people (represented by letters) on a test that's scored on a scale of 0-100, just to make it easier.
A- 40, B- 40, C- 40, D- 60, E- 60, F- 60, G-70, H- 90, I- 90, J- 100.
Average score: 65
Second take (high scorers aren't coming back)
A- 50, B-50, C-50, D-63, E-67, F-80, G-90
Average score: 64
Notice that every single one of our test-takers improved
. Every last one of them. And yet, the data that you're concerned with shows that the average score went down. How could this be? What travesty of arcane mathematicka has rendered such an outcome possible?
This is why it is infinitely more valuable to look at the raw data of whether people did better, worse, or neither on their retake. Because improvement is only relevant when measured in comparison to the individual's prior performance, not the overall mean. And I can't believe I had to take the time to do math to explain this to you.