7 ms·
I think you're underestimating how much of the inequality has been baked in by Junior year of High School. 16 years of living a life where parents and teachers
by charlesju 6y ago
I think you're underestimating how much of the inequality has been baked in by Junior year of High School. 16 years of living a life where parents and teachers nurture the students for maximum growth is going to be easily reflected in any way you want to measure aptitude against someone that grew up in a rough environment.
From the article it seems like the UC are going to develop their own test, that will further divide those with resources that can study and prep for multiple tests and those that cannot.
The issues with the diversity in the UC system are rooted in a much deeper level of inequality in society that probably cannot be fixed with these band aids.
- remarkEon 6y agoSeems totally unrelated, unless you believe that academic aptitude is 100% environmental.
- charlesju 6y agoEmpirical data shows those from upper middle class families tend to do better than those living near the poverty line. Seems pretty well documented at this point.
- remarkEon 6y agoSo? Empirical data also shows that if you’re 7’ tall you tend to be good at basketball. Pointing out that people who are doing well now tend to do well in the future is not a useful observation. My original point in this discussion was that removing the tests actually hurts people who are not doing well now, since they have fewer opinions to game the system and having an empirical and objective test of their abilities is the best (and cheapest) opportunity to stand out.