3 ms·

The general issue with merit-based systems is the definition of merit. In practice there are strong cultural aspects to it, favoring characteristics the dominan

by jmull 4y ago

The general issue with merit-based systems is the definition of merit. In practice there are strong cultural aspects to it, favoring characteristics the dominant group likes. So merit-based programs end up conferring the most advantages to those best conforming to the ideals of the dominant culture, strengthening the dominant culture. It's debatable (at least) whether that's a good thing... if you consider the dominant culture racist (or bad in some other way) then it's natural to consider the merit-based programs that support that culture a form a systemic racism.

vorpalhex 4y ago
> In practice there are strong cultural aspects to it Study, do your homework, behave? What "strong cultural aspect" do you see?
- mjburgess 4y ago
  That's quite funny... do you really not see it? Study the topics we think are important in the ways we think are important behaving in the ways we think are important. No schooling in human history looks like the schooling you're describing, yet you treat is as some concequence of nature.
  - nscalf 4y ago
    No schooling looks like study, do your homework, and behave? So any selection of topics to study is unacceptable by your criteria. We live in a society, we have to have some form of education. In order to give students an education, we have to pick curriculum for them to learn. Some topics are not very important, so we shouldn't focus on teaching them. What system would you prefer to have in place? Or would you rather jut pick the topics that are taught?
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    English, math and history? Like liberal arts educations aren't THAT newfangled. I realize it's not sophist philosophy but maybe a bit more well rounded.
ceeplusplus 4y ago
Math isn't racist. Whether you can pass an Algebra exam is not racist. If Asian kids who can barely read and write English can ace the exam, then so can poor minorities who were raised in the US. You can't claim word problems are suddenly racist when people who can barely read English are still acing them.
- jmull 4y ago
  From the article: > Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores. Anyway, I believe your observation about the relative success that Asian kids have in merit-based programs supports my contention that they are significantly cultural in nature, right?
  - ceeplusplus 4y ago
    If hard work and persistence at school is cultural, then sure. Can you describe exactly what you mean by cultural in nature? That 66% number can entirely come from differences in what each culture values - black culture values athletics and music whereas Asian culture values education. And you see that play out in the end product - black people are "overrepresented" in sports and music while Asians are "overrepresented" in academia and STEM. None of these differences make the merit program cultural in nature.
    - jmull 4y ago
thegrimmest 4y ago
The thing is that all behaviours carry cultural aspects to them. But clearly some behaviours lead to better economic outcomes than others right? Being sober, working hard, valuing education, cooperating well, these are cultural traits. This fact alone doesn't mean it's wrong to prefer them.
nscalf 4y ago
So your issues with this is merit in and of itself? Please explain a better system for outcomes than putting in the work and earning the outcome. What is the alternative? My point wasn't that merit based systems are inherently flawless, it's that it's the best type of system we use and we should focus on improvements, not blindly calling it racist. There have been cases of cultural bias in merit based systems (word problems that assume some knowledge), but those end up being fairly obvious and now that is taken into account when developing standardized tests. Even the use of the word racist here is nonsense. It implies malicious intent. For a test maker to not take into account every variation of culture is not racist, it's a negative side affect that can be improved on via iteration, not racist.
- jmull 4y ago
  > Please explain a better system for outcomes than putting in the work and earning the outcome. You are not understanding my point. It comes down to the criteria used to judge whether or not you've "earned" the outcome. You're assuming these are fair and I'm pointing out they are actually significantly tilted to favoring the dominant group. Let's say my family runs the town and happens to be fast sprinters. The people of the town complain that they'd like some say in how the town is run and threaten chaos if they don't get it. We bow to pressure but we set the new rules, and say, "Fine. We'll have a town council to run things that anyone can be on. We'll hold a 100 yard-dash to determine the members." It's objective. It's based on merit. But it ensures my family says in control. If my family had been poor sprinters but strong long-distance runners we might have held a 20K race instead. Still objective. Still merit-based. You still "put in the work and earn the outcome". But it still ensures my family stays in control. > Even the use of the word racist here is nonsense. It implies malicious intent. It's probably useful to understand the distinction between "racism" and "systemic racism" here. Racism is the belief that one race is superior (or conversely, inferior) to another. That's someone's direct thought or intent. Systemic racism, on the other hand, is a system that hold one race down while holding another race above them. Systemic racism doesn't require anyone to have have any racist beliefs or intent. It's just a system that has a certain effect. However, once someone becomes aware of a system that advantages one race to the detriment of another, whether they decide to support it or look for a better way is where there is potential racism.
proc0 4y ago
> programs end up conferring the most advantages to those best conforming to the ideals of the dominant culture The definition of merit for any given school, is transparent. School work is relatively straight forward, in that they are designed by the teachers for students to complete, and at the end of the year you can see how students were rewarded or punished with numbers. Also, not all merit-based systems are good, some may reward bad behavior etc., but the solution is not to get rid of merit, but rather adjust what you're selecting for. Also, I feel like "dominant culture" is an ambiguous term thrown around to justify the ideology of equity and how some groups of people are perpetually oppressed. Arguably the U.S. no longer has a dominant culture. There are many cities with neighborhoods where English isn't required (i.e. Chinatowns, Miami etc). This in turn affects the local schools and their curriculum, which means their merit-based system is for the most part under their control.

by jmull 4y ago

vorpalhex 4y ago

> In practice there are strong cultural aspects to it Study, do your homework, behave? What "strong cultural aspect" do you see?

mjburgess 4y ago
That's quite funny... do you really not see it? Study the topics we think are important in the ways we think are important behaving in the ways we think are important. No schooling in human history looks like the schooling you're describing, yet you treat is as some concequence of nature.
- nscalf 4y ago
  No schooling looks like study, do your homework, and behave? So any selection of topics to study is unacceptable by your criteria. We live in a society, we have to have some form of education. In order to give students an education, we have to pick curriculum for them to learn. Some topics are not very important, so we shouldn't focus on teaching them. What system would you prefer to have in place? Or would you rather jut pick the topics that are taught?
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  English, math and history? Like liberal arts educations aren't THAT newfangled. I realize it's not sophist philosophy but maybe a bit more well rounded.

ceeplusplus 4y ago

Math isn't racist. Whether you can pass an Algebra exam is not racist. If Asian kids who can barely read and write English can ace the exam, then so can poor minorities who were raised in the US. You can't claim word problems are suddenly racist when people who can barely read English are still acing them.

jmull 4y ago
From the article: > Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores. Anyway, I believe your observation about the relative success that Asian kids have in merit-based programs supports my contention that they are significantly cultural in nature, right?
- ceeplusplus 4y ago
  If hard work and persistence at school is cultural, then sure. Can you describe exactly what you mean by cultural in nature? That 66% number can entirely come from differences in what each culture values - black culture values athletics and music whereas Asian culture values education. And you see that play out in the end product - black people are "overrepresented" in sports and music while Asians are "overrepresented" in academia and STEM. None of these differences make the merit program cultural in nature.
  - jmull 4y ago

thegrimmest 4y ago

The thing is that all behaviours carry cultural aspects to them. But clearly some behaviours lead to better economic outcomes than others right? Being sober, working hard, valuing education, cooperating well, these are cultural traits. This fact alone doesn't mean it's wrong to prefer them.

nscalf 4y ago

So your issues with this is merit in and of itself? Please explain a better system for outcomes than putting in the work and earning the outcome. What is the alternative? My point wasn't that merit based systems are inherently flawless, it's that it's the best type of system we use and we should focus on improvements, not blindly calling it racist. There have been cases of cultural bias in merit based systems (word problems that assume some knowledge), but those end up being fairly obvious and now that is taken into account when developing standardized tests. Even the use of the word racist here is nonsense. It implies malicious intent. For a test maker to not take into account every variation of culture is not racist, it's a negative side affect that can be improved on via iteration, not racist.

jmull 4y ago
> Please explain a better system for outcomes than putting in the work and earning the outcome. You are not understanding my point. It comes down to the criteria used to judge whether or not you've "earned" the outcome. You're assuming these are fair and I'm pointing out they are actually significantly tilted to favoring the dominant group. Let's say my family runs the town and happens to be fast sprinters. The people of the town complain that they'd like some say in how the town is run and threaten chaos if they don't get it. We bow to pressure but we set the new rules, and say, "Fine. We'll have a town council to run things that anyone can be on. We'll hold a 100 yard-dash to determine the members." It's objective. It's based on merit. But it ensures my family says in control. If my family had been poor sprinters but strong long-distance runners we might have held a 20K race instead. Still objective. Still merit-based. You still "put in the work and earn the outcome". But it still ensures my family stays in control. > Even the use of the word racist here is nonsense. It implies malicious intent. It's probably useful to understand the distinction between "racism" and "systemic racism" here. Racism is the belief that one race is superior (or conversely, inferior) to another. That's someone's direct thought or intent. Systemic racism, on the other hand, is a system that hold one race down while holding another race above them. Systemic racism doesn't require anyone to have have any racist beliefs or intent. It's just a system that has a certain effect. However, once someone becomes aware of a system that advantages one race to the detriment of another, whether they decide to support it or look for a better way is where there is potential racism.

proc0 4y ago

> programs end up conferring the most advantages to those best conforming to the ideals of the dominant culture The definition of merit for any given school, is transparent. School work is relatively straight forward, in that they are designed by the teachers for students to complete, and at the end of the year you can see how students were rewarded or punished with numbers. Also, not all merit-based systems are good, some may reward bad behavior etc., but the solution is not to get rid of merit, but rather adjust what you're selecting for. Also, I feel like "dominant culture" is an ambiguous term thrown around to justify the ideology of equity and how some groups of people are perpetually oppressed. Arguably the U.S. no longer has a dominant culture. There are many cities with neighborhoods where English isn't required (i.e. Chinatowns, Miami etc). This in turn affects the local schools and their curriculum, which means their merit-based system is for the most part under their control.