3 ms·
Sorry, I think in editing I deleted my intermediate sentence. You are right, it measures under-representation, but the narrative and assumption is that under-re
by jack6e 9y ago
Sorry, I think in editing I deleted my intermediate sentence. You are right, it measures under-representation, but the narrative and assumption is that under-representation in university is problematic, worrisome, an issue. I think that assumption is false, and assuming that under-representation is an issue that can be fixed, or should be fixed, relies on assuming that there is some cause that does not originate with the individual. If individuals simply do not choose to attend university, then that is not a problem that should be forcefully fixed. If instead individuals from each race equally desire and apply to university, and still under-representation exists, then measuring it is useful. But in that case measuring application to acceptance is more accurate.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> but the narrative and assumption is that under-representation in university is problematic, worrisome, an issue Sure, but even if the mechanisms you suggest are assumed away (they aren't) are part of the mechanism of underrepresentation, it would still be all those things. In fact, I would see increasing racial divergence in either the perceived value of college or the rate of application independent of the perceived value of college and extremely worrying signs. But, really, before people accept the value of explaining the trend toward increasing black/hispanic underrepresentation, they need to understand that the exists; in case you haven't noticed, there is a very powerful (if entirely non-factual) narrative exact opposite is the case, driven by an increasingly powerful political faction, including the leadership of the executive branch of the US government.