3 ms·
> It largely feels like an excuse to lower the competitive bar to manage the demographics, allowing both more legacy hires and more representative demographics.
by shajznnckfke 6y ago
> It largely feels like an excuse to lower the competitive bar to manage the demographics, allowing both more legacy hires and more representative demographics.
It doesn’t seem like a good solution to that problem. How will removing test scores as a factor help smart kids of underrepresented minority groups against dumb rich kids (with influential parents) who are too lazy to study for the SAT? It seems much better to keep the test but apply a corrective factor if you believe it’s biased against some group. It’s the only way I can think of to keep the dumb rich kids out.
- bonoboTP 6y agoThe point was that they don't want to keep dumb rich kids out. The parents are an important money source and you don't want to upset the ruling elite by withholding from them the prestige they are used to.
- srtjstjsj 6y agoPublic schools aren't for the "ruling elite"
- legolas2412 6y agoThe point is to replace this objective transparent measure with a subjective opaque measure. Like alumni interviews, and ranking based on personality. That way they can twist the results a preferred way