5 ms·

No significant number of kids have any experience with sailing (regattas at least) or polo. This thus doesn't favor the non-poor, and certainly not white people

by burfog 9y ago

No significant number of kids have any experience with sailing (regattas at least) or polo. This thus doesn't favor the non-poor, and certainly not white people. The kids from rich families are so rare that you can treat them as non-existent, and even those kids aren't too likely to be into sailing and polo. Basically nobody does those things. The only bias is toward those who should score well: the students who read a wide variety of material and are thus well-prepared for the reading demands of college.

acdha 9y ago
Just to repeat the point, it’s about intentional versus unintentional usage. Nobody is saying that it’s wrong to test things like familiarity with a wide range of material, only that it’s important to only test the things you intend to test — i.e. what basic scientific principles would tell you to do in any similar situation. That doesn’t mean that you couldn’t e.g. publish a big reading list and say that the English test may include material by these authors since anyone could read that list; it’s just about keeping the competition fair by making sure anyone can learn all of what they should prepare for.
lsc 9y ago
>The kids from rich families are so rare that you can treat them as non-existent not so if you are trying to get into an elite school... 15-20% of the kids going to the really top schools come from parents in the top 1% of incomes[1] - if you are looking to get into an elite school, well, you are competing with really wealthy people. And if you want a job at one of the top bay area tech companies... well, i'm not saying it's impossible without a degree from an elite school, hell, I know people here who don't have any education... but it seems to me like a large proportion of their hires come from elite schools. [1]https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/brown-university https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit...
- burfog 9y ago
  The top 1% isn't rich. That is merely upper middle class. Those people still aren't in regattas. At no income level will you find a significant portion of people who are in regattas. Regattas just aren't a thing, generally. We could say top 0.0001% even... and still essentially no regattas. People don't do regattas. The question is fair.
  - lsc 9y ago
    > The top 1% isn't rich. That is merely upper middle class. yeah, we can argue all day about what defines a class, and by older standards, 99th percentile still puts you solidly in the 'working class' as defined by people who, you know, had to work, rather than those rich enough to let their capital do it all. but... the point remains that there's a huge difference between someone in the top ten percent of incomes and someone in the bottom ten percent of incomes. (I'd go so far as to say that there is a bigger difference between the top 20% and the bottom 20% than there is between the top 20% and the top 0.1% - just 'cause having a top 20% income gives you access to most of what society has on offer.) And this difference is wide and deep and has a lot to do with what sort of information you encounter; I think it's fair to say that you are likely to know a lot more about boating if you are wealthy, just like how poor people are likely to know a lot more, say, about football or the price of fast food. >We could say top 0.0001% even... and still essentially no regattas. People don't do regattas. So, I'm closer to the top 20% than the top 1%, but I've got family members who own sailboats, and even a family member who was pretty into competitive rowing. I think this is more common than you think for this income tax bracket. I bet that'd be a lot less likely if I was born into the bottom quintile.

by burfog 9y ago

acdha 9y ago

Just to repeat the point, it’s about intentional versus unintentional usage. Nobody is saying that it’s wrong to test things like familiarity with a wide range of material, only that it’s important to only test the things you intend to test — i.e. what basic scientific principles would tell you to do in any similar situation. That doesn’t mean that you couldn’t e.g. publish a big reading list and say that the English test may include material by these authors since anyone could read that list; it’s just about keeping the competition fair by making sure anyone can learn all of what they should prepare for.

lsc 9y ago

>The kids from rich families are so rare that you can treat them as non-existent not so if you are trying to get into an elite school... 15-20% of the kids going to the really top schools come from parents in the top 1% of incomes[1] - if you are looking to get into an elite school, well, you are competing with really wealthy people. And if you want a job at one of the top bay area tech companies... well, i'm not saying it's impossible without a degree from an elite school, hell, I know people here who don't have any education... but it seems to me like a large proportion of their hires come from elite schools. [1]https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/brown-university https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit...

burfog 9y ago
The top 1% isn't rich. That is merely upper middle class. Those people still aren't in regattas. At no income level will you find a significant portion of people who are in regattas. Regattas just aren't a thing, generally. We could say top 0.0001% even... and still essentially no regattas. People don't do regattas. The question is fair.
- lsc 9y ago
  > The top 1% isn't rich. That is merely upper middle class. yeah, we can argue all day about what defines a class, and by older standards, 99th percentile still puts you solidly in the 'working class' as defined by people who, you know, had to work, rather than those rich enough to let their capital do it all. but... the point remains that there's a huge difference between someone in the top ten percent of incomes and someone in the bottom ten percent of incomes. (I'd go so far as to say that there is a bigger difference between the top 20% and the bottom 20% than there is between the top 20% and the top 0.1% - just 'cause having a top 20% income gives you access to most of what society has on offer.) And this difference is wide and deep and has a lot to do with what sort of information you encounter; I think it's fair to say that you are likely to know a lot more about boating if you are wealthy, just like how poor people are likely to know a lot more, say, about football or the price of fast food. >We could say top 0.0001% even... and still essentially no regattas. People don't do regattas. So, I'm closer to the top 20% than the top 1%, but I've got family members who own sailboats, and even a family member who was pretty into competitive rowing. I think this is more common than you think for this income tax bracket. I bet that'd be a lot less likely if I was born into the bottom quintile.