4 ms·

Equity is a deeply evil ideology. The only way to achieve equality of outcome is to repress the out-performers. Promoters of this dogma of course deny that, but

• ceejayoz 4y ago
  They didn't really cut it, they renamed it. AP classes, independent study, and dedicated schools for high-performing students, rather than just individual classes in the main schools. https://vansd.org/highly-capable-services/ https://vansd.org/highly-capable-services/
  • tomp 4y ago
    bad example, but there are tons of others https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curriculum-guidelines.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curric... "The draft rejected the idea of naturally gifted children, recommended against shifting certain students into accelerated courses in middle school"
    • ceejayoz 4y ago
      You should read that article a bit more. > The model has been in place since 2014, yielding a few years of data on retention and diversity that has been picked over by experts on both sides of the de-tracking debate. And while the data is complicated by numerous variables — a pandemic now among them — those who support San Francisco’s model say it has led to more students, and a more diverse set of students, taking advanced courses, without bringing down high achievers. > California’s recommendations aim to expand the options for high-level math, so that students could take courses in, say, data science or statistics without losing their edge on college applications. (The move requires buy-in from colleges; in recent years, the University of California system has de-emphasized the importance of calculus credits.)
• snowwrestler 4y ago
  You’re just really confused about what equity is. It’s not “equality of outcome.” The whole point of seeking equity is to free the out-performers from the chains holding them down. Edit to add: Seeking equity is about surfacing relevant merit, and fighting irrelevant demerits. For example if someone has the skill to be a great engineer they should not be given the job of taking notes in meetings just because they are a woman. Gender is irrelevant to engineering. But many people who aren’t male find their engineering career progression slowed because of their gender. That is not an equitable outcome. But obviously it’s impossible to create an equal outcome: you can’t magically make everyone on Earth a great engineer.
  • tomp 4y ago
    Can you define what “equity” is then, according to your understanding? To me, “freeing the outperformers” sounds like “meritocracy” which I wholeheartedly support!
    • snowwrestler 4y ago
      See my edit. Equity means your outcome is determined by relevant metrics, and not by irrelevant metrics.
      • tomp 4y ago
        You’ve described meritocracy. Equity is pretty explicitly anti-meritocratic. E.g. a woman should be hired over a man, or a black should be accepted to university instead of an Asian, not because they’re more skilled or have greater potential, but to address historical grievances and/or ensure proportional percentage-wise representation.
        • bergenty 4y ago
          Meritocracy only works when everyone starts on an even footing. What we are attempting to do is equity of circumstances so meritocracy can truly take hold.
        • 4y ago
• bergenty 4y ago
  No, there’s a perfectly valid course to help the under-performers perform as well as they can and help the out performers reach new heights. Equity doesn’t have to be perfect, the closer we can approach the ideal the better. What’s deeply evil is your opinion purporting your straw man is the only way forward to blatantly push your agenda.