6 ms·

No one argues discrimination is bad, they argue discrimination based on something as arbitrary as skin color or gender is bad. It reads to me as very disingenuo

by toolz 4y ago

No one argues discrimination is bad, they argue discrimination based on something as arbitrary as skin color or gender is bad. It reads to me as very disingenuous to frame the conversation as if there was an argument to be made that college's discriminating on unrelated, unchangeable, inherited characteristics is fair or just.

fsckboy 4y ago
> No one argues discrimination is bad, they argue discrimination based on something as arbitrary as skin color or gender is bad. you're wrong. being in favor of "equitable outcomes" today frequently means arguing that discrimination on the basis of math or other test scores is bad. Google "math is whiteness" or see the elimination of gifted and talented programs in public schools
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  > Google "math is whiteness" That's about how teaching methods are failing some children, and then they're being judged for it unfairly. It's not against proper education and testing and using that to sort.
  - fsckboy 4y ago
    > teaching methods are failing some children if you assume that all children are equally capable of learning everything then you are forced to conclude that teaching methods are failing some children. But if you "believe in science" (it's quite popular today to profess belief in science), you don't believe assumptions like that.
    - CuriousCosmic 4y ago
      All children are equally capable of learning but different children are receptive to different teaching styles and approaches. Only teaching children with a small selection of approaches that were primarily refined with middle to upper class white neuro-typical children can be considered discriminatory. That's the point of those studies. It would be like forcing a kid who is growing up in middle-to-upper class western society to solely learn mathematics via ancient greek visual proofs and then blame them for not understanding maths because they "just aren't trying" or "they aren't smart". Everybody has equal capacities to learn but only if you can find the style of learning which works for each person.
      - rosmax_1337 4y ago
        Is it true that all children are equally capable of learning?
        zdragnar 4y ago
        When broken down by race, yes. Economic status and two-parent vs one-parent households are both stronger indicators of educational achievement than pretty much any other, including race.
        halostatue 4y ago
        However, when broken down by race, economic status is heavily weighted by race in America and Canada (differently in each country, but but still present). One can’t simply assume spherical cows here, because there is a deeply historic, systemic, and persistent imbalance which gets compounded through chronic underfunding of economically depressed (and mostly minority) education systems. Some of the systemic racism is ongoing and being actively encouraged by bad actors who misuse the words of Dr King to oppose real measures that would begin to address these imbalances.
        lmm 4y ago
        Not remotely. But it's very inconvenient to acknowledge that.
josephcsible 4y ago
A lot of people argue that if exam scores or GPAs are correlated with unchangeable, inherited characteristics, then discriminating on exam scores or GPAs is unfair and unjust.
- halostatue 4y ago
  If exam scores / GPAs are correlated systemic (or, if you prefer, environmental) injustices and imbalances, then discriminating on those scores without considering the imbalances is unfair and unjust. Race and economic status are heavily linked in the United States (https://voxeu.org/article/race-and-economic-opportunity-united-states https://voxeu.org/article/race-and-economic-opportunity-unit...). Children of lower economic means often have food security issues (they can‘t guarantee having had breakfast and/or even having a lunch every day). It is known that hungry children do worse educationally than those who are not hungry. It’s also known that when there’s a healthy school lunch program, there’s a substantial lift in educational results: > We find that in years when a school contracts with a healthy lunch company, students at the school score better on end-of-year academic tests. On average, student test scores are 0.03 to 0.04 standard deviations higher (about 4 percentile points). Not only that, the test score increases are about 40 percent larger for students who qualify for reduced-price or free school lunches. These students are also the ones who are most likely to eat the school lunches. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/05/03/how-the-quality-of-school-lunch-affects-students-academic-performance/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/... So, the people arguing aren’t arguing about "unchangeable, inherited" characteristics, but are instead arguing about very changeable ongoing systemic injustices.

by toolz 4y ago

fsckboy 4y ago

> No one argues discrimination is bad, they argue discrimination based on something as arbitrary as skin color or gender is bad. you're wrong. being in favor of "equitable outcomes" today frequently means arguing that discrimination on the basis of math or other test scores is bad. Google "math is whiteness" or see the elimination of gifted and talented programs in public schools

Dylan16807 4y ago
> Google "math is whiteness" That's about how teaching methods are failing some children, and then they're being judged for it unfairly. It's not against proper education and testing and using that to sort.
- fsckboy 4y ago
  > teaching methods are failing some children if you assume that all children are equally capable of learning everything then you are forced to conclude that teaching methods are failing some children. But if you "believe in science" (it's quite popular today to profess belief in science), you don't believe assumptions like that.
  - CuriousCosmic 4y ago
    All children are equally capable of learning but different children are receptive to different teaching styles and approaches. Only teaching children with a small selection of approaches that were primarily refined with middle to upper class white neuro-typical children can be considered discriminatory. That's the point of those studies. It would be like forcing a kid who is growing up in middle-to-upper class western society to solely learn mathematics via ancient greek visual proofs and then blame them for not understanding maths because they "just aren't trying" or "they aren't smart". Everybody has equal capacities to learn but only if you can find the style of learning which works for each person.
    - rosmax_1337 4y ago
      Is it true that all children are equally capable of learning?
      - zdragnar 4y ago
        When broken down by race, yes. Economic status and two-parent vs one-parent households are both stronger indicators of educational achievement than pretty much any other, including race.
        halostatue 4y ago
        However, when broken down by race, economic status is heavily weighted by race in America and Canada (differently in each country, but but still present). One can’t simply assume spherical cows here, because there is a deeply historic, systemic, and persistent imbalance which gets compounded through chronic underfunding of economically depressed (and mostly minority) education systems. Some of the systemic racism is ongoing and being actively encouraged by bad actors who misuse the words of Dr King to oppose real measures that would begin to address these imbalances.
      - lmm 4y ago
        Not remotely. But it's very inconvenient to acknowledge that.

josephcsible 4y ago

A lot of people argue that if exam scores or GPAs are correlated with unchangeable, inherited characteristics, then discriminating on exam scores or GPAs is unfair and unjust.

halostatue 4y ago
If exam scores / GPAs are correlated systemic (or, if you prefer, environmental) injustices and imbalances, then discriminating on those scores without considering the imbalances is unfair and unjust. Race and economic status are heavily linked in the United States (https://voxeu.org/article/race-and-economic-opportunity-united-states https://voxeu.org/article/race-and-economic-opportunity-unit...). Children of lower economic means often have food security issues (they can‘t guarantee having had breakfast and/or even having a lunch every day). It is known that hungry children do worse educationally than those who are not hungry. It’s also known that when there’s a healthy school lunch program, there’s a substantial lift in educational results: > We find that in years when a school contracts with a healthy lunch company, students at the school score better on end-of-year academic tests. On average, student test scores are 0.03 to 0.04 standard deviations higher (about 4 percentile points). Not only that, the test score increases are about 40 percent larger for students who qualify for reduced-price or free school lunches. These students are also the ones who are most likely to eat the school lunches. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/05/03/how-the-quality-of-school-lunch-affects-students-academic-performance/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/... So, the people arguing aren’t arguing about "unchangeable, inherited" characteristics, but are instead arguing about very changeable ongoing systemic injustices.