541–550 of 647 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The color blind thinking modal has a long history of helping the majority stay the majority. Come on guys, to be less racist we must be MORE racist!
Or the alternative or your reality.. ignore Jim Crow existed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That kid working 25 hours a week to help their family make rent is going to have an easier time buckling down for one test than keeping up their GPA over four years. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2021/03/23/sta...
I agree that there are issues with GPA too, but despite saying that it's easier to take one test than it is to maintain a high GPA throughout high school, that's opinion. Teachers can work with over extended students to help them while they are in school I can't really speak to your opinion piece because its behind a paywall
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn't. The author seems to have a gut-felt conviction that there is no bias or damage in standardized testing or its subsequent use for university admissions.
what? did you RTFA? The author gives an argument based on concrete evidence that the SAT helps underrepresented minorities, and states there ALREADY is a pathway (that also lots of underrepresented minorities use) that avoids the SAT, the biggest problem being that statewide guidance counselors are not instructed on the existence of that pathway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn't. The author seems to have a gut-felt conviction that there is no bias or damage in standardized testing or its subsequent use for university admissions.
Did you even read the article? > How do I know all of this? Because unlike the regents, who enthusiastically voted to eliminate the tests for the first time in 2020, I did not ignore the findings of a 225-page report that was prepared for them at the request of the UC’s then-president, Janet Napolitano. This report[1], by the Academic Council’s Standardized Testing Task Force, was based on years of UC admissions data…
If it is the link in the chain which makes sure the disparity is carried on, especially to bigger amplifiers like college admission, then the decision to abandon it is clear.
What I find very odd about this is the assumption that kids in challenging circumstances would have more problem with test prep than with keeping up their GPA. Poor people can afford test prep. Stuyvesant, NYC’s selective admission high school, has 50% of students living in poverty, and a 1300+ average SAT score. A couple of thousand dollars one time is something most Americans can scrape together. Gaming GPA is much…
I'm not too sure about your guess that most Americans can afford even a one time payment of a couple thousand dollars. That seems to way underestimate how impoverished many families are. To your note about GPA being easy to game, that's definitely true. The real issue is that families with means will likely always be able to game the system in some way. Testing and college admission coaches can be hired, opportunitie…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it shouldn't, but as a society we seem to want it to so it does. Sowell has an interesting take on AA and believes it actually does more harm than good because it pits those subject to it against scenarios they have not been prepared to handle and thus in turn results in over-stress, higher rates of failure, and ultimately disillusionment.
I thought AA meant that, when given two equally qualified applicants, where one is caucasian and the other is a minority, the seat should go to the minority. In light of that, Sowell's take makes no sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought AA meant that, when given two equally qualified applicants, where one is caucasian and the other is a minority, the seat should go to the minority. In light of that, Sowell's take makes no sense.
If that’s what it once meant it’s since been perverted. Many places use a point system that gives additional points to under privileged applicants. And then there are programs that straight up take groups of inner city kids and give them full rides. Pretty equitable on the surface but perhaps not as effective or fair as intended in the long run. These type of AA programs are what Sowell is critiquing. In his opinion…
The author is missing the point of this education.
For almost ALL students the aim is to get a prestigious certificate as this is the gateway to a upper middle class lifestyle.
The education is largely irrelevant. (Most are going to end up as real estate agents of financial advisors anyway).
Which is why a bunch of rich Hollywood folk were recently bust for bribing their way into top Californian colleges. It was not for the calculus.
Fear not for the kids: these top universities handle the intellectual demands with soft courses, grading on a curve, supplementary exams, oral exams, etc.
The only real challenge is to get in. Politicising it is the best approach for a large demographic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought AA meant that, when given two equally qualified applicants, where one is caucasian and the other is a minority, the seat should go to the minority. In light of that, Sowell's take makes no sense.
> given two equally qualified applicants I wonder if that push toward diminishing the impact of measurable, standardized testing isn't an attempts at generating more "equally qualified applicants"
Here’s the “logic”: If we give a standardized test to a random selection of people and then look at the results and add a racial overlay, white people (allegedly) disproportionately succeed. Therefore the test itself is racist. It is an unwanted artifact that encodes the privileged (alleged) majority’s innate biases and confers structural racism upon future generations. These artifacts must be purged. This is the way.
Let’s concede for a moment the definition of structural racism and agree it’s worth addressing in the admissions process. The problem then is not the desire to address the perceived oppression, but rather the conclusion that we should just tear down the racist institution without a viable replacement on hand. If we tear down pillars of rational society (or, western liberalism), then what remains is not ideologically consistent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SAT results correlate highly with IQ, and IQ correlates highly with success in life. Still, people engage in all kinds of postmodern mental gymnastics to explain why an intuitively obvious fact is somehow false.
Your statement immediately has a problem. How do you define success? Then you have a second problem when you state a person taking one test is also good on a different test. Going much over 100 has little correlation with wealth which is what most studies use. Then you run into correlation doesn’t equal causation problem too.
Let us look at the USA of today and its social ills. Quality of a random person's life is undeniably better if they manage:
* to avoid going into jail/prison, * to always have a home, * to be drug-free, or at least drug addiction-free, * to be fit (= not obese), * to be employed or self-employed, * to finish their high school education at least.
Those points might sound modest, but if someone can tick off all of them, they are already sorta successful, especially compared to someone who can only tick off one or two.
A nation of people who could tick off 5 of 6 would probably be much happier than contemporary America.
Do all those points correlate with IQ? I would guess yes, but IANA Social Scientist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any change to the college admissions process will positively affect some groups and negatively affect others. There will always be some controversy over whether any change actually makes it fairer or whether the changes were made to achieve a specific outcome.
At a superficial level yes. The actual impact to people and society I think is far greater and will have an overall negative affect on society and interracial relationships. Putting myself in the shoes of someone that was bumped out of something they earned through hard work and dedication because my skin color was not correct would make me bitter to those that implemented the policy as well as (hopefully less so) th…
But why threaten to become a racist particularly?
We need discourse, demonstrations and solutions, that insititions should very well look for and nuture young talent from wherever it may come from.
But to threaten to be actively racist, without ecploring any other solution is truly telling.