4 ms·
You know, on reflection, this is actually a good thing. Not because of the diversity - screw diversity. Because you'll have more people with aptitude admitted.
by anonymous 13y ago
You know, on reflection, this is actually a good thing. Not because of the diversity - screw diversity. Because you'll have more people with aptitude admitted. Programming aptitude is mostly evenly distributed regardless of gender and race, therefore if you keep your number admitted persons constant, but give a good incentive for every kind of person to apply, you'll end up with better applicants. Or to put it another way, the best 1000 white male americans are worse than the best 1000 americans in general. And at least in this case, I'd expect that there would be about as many capable females as males. Things might go skewed if we try to have the same number of heterosexuals and homosexuals or left-handed and right-handed people though.
- 011011100 13y ago"Programming aptitude is mostly evenly distributed regardless of gender and race," Is it really?
- davorak 13y agoIs there solid evidence of an IQ difference between the genders or a general subject, with a biological understanding of why such a difference exists? I currently have not come across any such solid evidence and biological understanding.
- mathattack 13y agoIndependently of whether it is or isn't, there is benefit to trying to get as broad a swatch of the population into programming as possible. My thinking on this has changed over the years. I used to view programming as a pure meritocracy. Then I realized that the same thing could be said about so many other male dominated fields, whose barriers eventually broke down. (Law, Accounting, Teaching...) Now my inclination is to believe that there are other things at work: parental expectations, mentorship, etc. that are bigger drivers. And how much downside is there if we smartly (key word!) try to be more inclusive in the field? I don't mean lowering standards, but I do mean outreach, identifying mentors, etc.