3 ms·

I definitely agree with your general view, it is my opinion too. But then... that doesn’t help someone now who is very talented, able, hard working, but was ov

I definitely agree with your general view, it is my opinion too. But then... that doesn’t help someone now who is very talented, able, hard working, but was overlooked for promotions because of gender or race. And part of breaking the pattern of white men promoting white men for the top jobs is mixing it up a bit. The country has the right to get the best experts for the top jobs, but also people have the right for an equal chance to get that job. I won’t pretend I have the answer, but I’m less pragmatic about it than I used to be.

failwhaleshark 6y ago
There's no perfect answer to please everyone, but I think there are better answers to prepare, attract, and graduate more competent graduates. I think the only fair option on the admissions-side is to maintain high standards of selection the same for everyone. Race, gender, disabilities, adversity, income (handled after admission), and legacy shouldn't be considered... name and address should also be blinded to avoid biases. The main discriminants ought to be leadership, achievement, curiosity, and potential. There should be some discretion without focusing on who's the most wronged victim. At the macro scale: all underperforming schools anywhere below a threshold should receive specialized "A-teams" of educators and organization miracle-workers with the legal authority, clout, and budgetary influence to get buy-in and improve the schools over a long-enough term until they're at least as good as the "rich kids'" schools. Any school that fails to maintain themselves up to minimum (good) standards gets taken over and run by the county or state. Buildings and classroom conditions should also be regularly-inspected like restaurants. At the micro scale: - Serious mentorship of students should be a universal right. There are plenty of older people with exceptional wisdom and life experiences that kids can benefit from, especially hope and positive mental attitude. - Some sort of personable, respected, well-liked school counselor needs to have ongoing 1:1 with each student throughout the year and as-needed. - Students who are underperforming or disengaged should be nonjudgmentally listened to to see if there's any way the school and/or parents can help. Do they need a vacation or change of scenery? Are they being bullied? Are they depressed? Are they ill? Do they get enough to eat? .. IOW, what is really going on with them that could possibly be helped and supported without it being a punishment, embarrassment, or lack of agency? - Mental healthcare, actual healthcare, hearing and vision care, social services, housing, and nutritional assistance all need to be assured so students can focus and have a fair opportunity to do their best. In the US, there has to be the will and the backing to maintain a high-performing educational system, or it will crumble and lose what made that exceptional. Edit: One love and human family.
- rich_sasha 6y ago
  It is all true, yet none of this helps someone who is now 50 and has been discriminated for 30 years of an academic career. Like I say, I'm definitely not a fan of 'background-adjusting' academic achievement, equally if I were that discriminated person, told yet again "sorry, but mr White Man has a better track record of being awarded jobs by white men", I'd be livid. For record, I am a white man. I don't know what the right balance is, but I won't dismiss out of hand making some kind of adjustment. It's not that different to looking at academic grades, one coming from a lenient market, and one from a harsh one.

failwhaleshark 6y ago

There's no perfect answer to please everyone, but I think there are better answers to prepare, attract, and graduate more competent graduates. I think the only fair option on the admissions-side is to maintain high standards of selection the same for everyone. Race, gender, disabilities, adversity, income (handled after admission), and legacy shouldn't be considered... name and address should also be blinded to avoid biases. The main discriminants ought to be leadership, achievement, curiosity, and potential. There should be some discretion without focusing on who's the most wronged victim. At the macro scale: all underperforming schools anywhere below a threshold should receive specialized "A-teams" of educators and organization miracle-workers with the legal authority, clout, and budgetary influence to get buy-in and improve the schools over a long-enough term until they're at least as good as the "rich kids'" schools. Any school that fails to maintain themselves up to minimum (good) standards gets taken over and run by the county or state. Buildings and classroom conditions should also be regularly-inspected like restaurants. At the micro scale: - Serious mentorship of students should be a universal right. There are plenty of older people with exceptional wisdom and life experiences that kids can benefit from, especially hope and positive mental attitude. - Some sort of personable, respected, well-liked school counselor needs to have ongoing 1:1 with each student throughout the year and as-needed. - Students who are underperforming or disengaged should be nonjudgmentally listened to to see if there's any way the school and/or parents can help. Do they need a vacation or change of scenery? Are they being bullied? Are they depressed? Are they ill? Do they get enough to eat? .. IOW, what is really going on with them that could possibly be helped and supported without it being a punishment, embarrassment, or lack of agency? - Mental healthcare, actual healthcare, hearing and vision care, social services, housing, and nutritional assistance all need to be assured so students can focus and have a fair opportunity to do their best. In the US, there has to be the will and the backing to maintain a high-performing educational system, or it will crumble and lose what made that exceptional. Edit: One love and human family.

rich_sasha 6y ago
It is all true, yet none of this helps someone who is now 50 and has been discriminated for 30 years of an academic career. Like I say, I'm definitely not a fan of 'background-adjusting' academic achievement, equally if I were that discriminated person, told yet again "sorry, but mr White Man has a better track record of being awarded jobs by white men", I'd be livid. For record, I am a white man. I don't know what the right balance is, but I won't dismiss out of hand making some kind of adjustment. It's not that different to looking at academic grades, one coming from a lenient market, and one from a harsh one.