Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[SIZE=2]Alison Collins: Board of Education Commissioner @SFUnified tweeted:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] [/SIZE]
"Please be mindful that 'merit' is an inherently racist construct designed and centered on white supremacist framing that justifies who IS and ISN’T worthy of education, safety, justice, empathy... basically humanity." https://twitter.com/AliMCollins/stat...90352020729856
I've read the paper she references, as well as other commentators on the same paper, and I still don't get it.
It seems to me like they are using "merit" incorrectly.
Testing doesn't test inherent worth, but rather, what stage of education you are at, and what would be the next appropriate class.
Some 14 year olds are ready for advanced algebra, and others aren't. Are the opponents of testing saying that everyone needs to be doing exaclty the same work, no matter what their level is?
How is it reasonable to expect kids who spend 3 or 4 hours a night doing homework to be in the same class as kids who not only don't do homework, but don't even show up for class some times?
Is that what they are asking for?
I just don't understand what remedy these educators are looking for.
I agree that testing is not a good predictor of future performance, nor of inherent abilities, but it probably is a pretty good predictor of what a student's attainment and abilities are, and what their next classes should cover.
Those who think "merit" is racist apparently think there must be inferior races.
Exactly. The irony is that many "woke" folks are afflicted with this type of racism. In fact, the entire "woke" movement is based on racism and sexism.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,462,489 times
Reputation: 12187
The left's war on merit based admissions at elite public schools dominated by Asians will actually mean more Whites and less Asians enrolled at those schools, all to get a few more Black and Hispanics in the door. Rich White kids already attend private schools not affected by these rulings. The school this ruling is about is only about 10% White. You'd think the Intersectionality People would be thrilled - since all non Whites are bound by a history of discrimination - but they seem to hate successful Asians.
I couldn't view the whole article, just the first couple of page but it seems the author commits several logical flaws right from the beginning, the largest being conflating, (intentionally?) two different topics -- eugenics and merit. People know eugenics is bad so by equating merit with eugenics, then merit is also bad.
Obviously two different things with different meanings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer
I have been hearing the argument that standardized tests are racist or culturally biased for several decades now.
.
There is some validity to this argument. Not that it validates the article, but the fact there is some partial truth to how tests are written can be used by those who argue against merit as camouflage.
An example, when I was in college they tested several ACT tests on us. For one of the verbal tests, instead of just collecting statistics, they actually gave the corrected tests back and asked us why we answered what we did, esp on the questions we got "wrong." Most of these were of the infamous "pick the best answer" type where there is no factually correct answer, but a desired answer based on the opinions of those who wrote the question. The cultural issue that came up is words and phrases often mean different things depending on what culture you're in.
A rather common example of that is "bless your heart" which southerners know means something different that what it says. Not that it was a test question, but an easy example. The actual example from the test that sticks most in my mind was having to read a passage about football and then answer several questions about the passage. There are a lot of terms in football that mean specific things in the game, but have different meanings in general. Then, there is the further complication of which game of "football" was intended. The hardcore soccer players in the room answered based on the soccer definition of terms.
It wasn't intentional, but basically through ignorance of the rest of the world, the cultural bias of the test's authors crept into the wording of the test questions and the "most correct" answers.
If you need to demonstrate that you are competent in mathematics and physics in order to successfully compete in Engineering School, that's not racist.
I could not care less from which race you arose. It's just not relevant.
You can afford this kind of nonsense as long as it doesn't reach the people who design and make the houses you live in, the cars you drive, the airplanes you fly on, the communication networks you use to get information, the foods you eat.
Once the planes fall out of the sky, the cars stop working, the internet breaks down, the food you're meant to eat is actual poison..you'll realize real quickly that you wish you had believed in merit.
[/quote] Testing doesn't test inherent worth, but rather, what stage of education you are at, and what would be the next appropriate class.
...
Some 14 year olds are ready for advanced algebra, and others aren't. Are the opponents of testing saying that everyone needs to be doing exaclty the same work, no matter what their level is?
..
I agree that testing is not a good predictor of future performance, nor of inherent abilities, but it probably is a pretty good predictor of what a student's attainment and abilities are, and what their next classes should cover.[/quote]
I wanted to respond to this separately since it's a different issue from the one about merit. Many, perhaps most, of us who oppose standardized testing do so on completely different grounds that what you stated. No we don't believe everyone needs to be doing exactly the same work or be at the same level or any of those red herring type statements.
Our opposition to standardized testing comes from the flaws inherent within the test process and tests themselves.
a. The test structure and style lends itself to being "gamed" by those who can get coaching on how to game the test. Our school district spends a great deal of time on test techniques and test taking skills when that time would be better spent on learning the material.
b. Corollary to "a" is it leads to teaching to the test. Basically if it's not tested, it doesn't get taught. Now some people may argue that if the test measures what needs to be learned, then teaching to the test means that's what is taught. Except the test doesn't measure everything that needs to be learned, only a small subset. So most of what is taught maximizes that small subset.
c. A single high stakes test is not a valid indicator of routine performance. It's one data point and one data point is not a trend. It might provide statistical information across a large pool of students, but provides little for the individual student.
d. Corollary to "c" is continuous assessment provides better insight into performance and what needs to be "fixed" for the student to proceed. Much like in QC in industry, end of assembly line QC is a long outmoded concept because the cost of fixing problems found at the end of the line is much greater than the cost of fixing/preventing them from occurring much earlier in the process. From a student perspective it does no good to fail them at the end of the year if those problems could have been caught and corrected earlier on.
e. It's not good test methodology. The test themselves use methods designed to "trick" test takers. That doesn't measure knowledge so much as catching the "trick." One of these is the infamous (as mentioned in my other post) "pick the most correct answer" when several answers could be right depending on how you interpret the words vs how the test writer interpreted the words. Part of this is in how the answers are written -- one "best" answer; one obviously wrong answer; and two might be the "right" answer "distractors" meant to pull the student away from the "best" answer because they could be right depending on your point of view.
No I'm not a teacher nor do I work in a school system; just someone who is vitally concerned about the path our education system is on and it's impact on national competitiveness and national security.
Last edited by tnff; 10-24-2020 at 09:27 AM..
Reason: I think I lost the OP's name in quote. It was not intentional.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
