7 ms·
> Equality of opportunity over outcome for me I'm also Asian American. This to me seems like it IS opportunity over outcome though. If you have two people who
by rifung 7y ago
> Equality of opportunity over outcome for me
I'm also Asian American.
This to me seems like it IS opportunity over outcome though. If you have two people who are equally hard working and one grows up in a disadvantaged environment, the latter going to score lower.
My parents sacrificed a lot so I could go to a good school. It was completely obvious to see that not that hard working people at my school would do much better than extremely hard working people from poorer districts.
The thing is, I imagine the people who worked harder but scored lower would probably fare better if given equal opportunity but they aren't.
> My family sacrificing vacations and eating out for 12 years (literally ate out 5x max) to afford to live in a good school district shouldn’t penalize us. My dad commuted 4 hours daily instead of moving...I’m getting pushed further and further to the right
If implemented correctly (and that's a big if) this should just make it so parents don't have to go through those sacrifices. Isn't that a good thing?
- esyir 7y agoStrong disagreement from me here. I believe that encouraging parents to invest in their children's growth is a good thing. Removing/reducing the benefit of this investment in the child is the kind of perverse incentive that's probably bad for society as a whole. Simply put, parents are now forced to weigh the comparative benefit of a high-end university education over the child's development. I'm betting that diminishing returns on development investment will at some point encourage investment in gaming the adversity score instead.
- rifung 7y ago> I believe that encouraging parents to invest in their children's growth is a good thing. No disagreement from me there. However, I would prefer if a child's outcome were not so dependent on how willing their parents are to make sacrifices. > Simply put, parents are now forced to weigh the comparative benefit of a high-end university education over the child's development. I'm betting that diminishing returns on development investment will at some point encourage investment in gaming the adversity score instead. I'd argue the current system already does this. Placing such a high emphasis on scores just makes it so that parents are strongly encouraged to put their children in SAT/AP prep scores while ignoring other things that would likely be much more important. I went to a school full of wealthy students. Almost all of them took prep classes to get really high scores. As far as I could tell, there was absolutely no instance of people learning for the sake of learning and little no to interest in doing something for the sake of a child's development.
- esyir 7y agoPrep classes can result in some side-channel learning. Adversity score manipulation... not so much.