Comments on: Race Proxies http://www.acri.org/blog/2009/08/21/race-proxies/ "Race has no place in American Life or Law" Thu, 02 Sep 2010 10:37:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: La Shawn Barber http://www.acri.org/blog/2009/08/21/race-proxies/comment-page-1/#comment-2423 La Shawn Barber Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:57:55 +0000 http://www.acri.org/blog/?p=2422#comment-2423 Agreed, Chetly. Noncog factors are not objectionable. How schools ae using them present the problem. If these factors result in more blacks admitted, it proves to me that blacks' noncog qualities were given more weight than those of whites, which is racially discriminatory. Agreed, Chetly. Noncog factors are not objectionable. How schools ae using them present the problem. If these factors result in more blacks admitted, it proves to me that blacks’ noncog qualities were given more weight than those of whites, which is racially discriminatory.

]]> By: Chetly Zarko http://www.acri.org/blog/2009/08/21/race-proxies/comment-page-1/#comment-2421 Chetly Zarko Thu, 27 Aug 2009 07:16:43 +0000 http://www.acri.org/blog/?p=2422#comment-2421 LaShawn, I agree generally that most (haven't found one hat is not ... yet) of these non-cog measures are fancy attempts to put easier numbers on skin color, since words like "leadership", or even "educational benefits" and "diversity," are inherently so nebulous as to not be measurable. The question then is what is it measuring, and you're right, the intent is clear. That said, non-cog measures are in PRINCIPLE (not in practice) not morally objectionable, and some are as precise as test scores. For example, socio-economic criteria can measure "adversity" fairly clearly - but like most other clear measures, as universities argue, it would admit too many other poor non-minorities and water down the intended consequence. Another measure would be test score excellence at a particularly poorly performing school compared to a similar score at a high-performing school - or the creation of "educational empowerment zones" (the reason I don't reject socio-economic possibilities - because I think simple poverty preferences are no more effective than any other preference) in areas where schools of choice or charters are also predominant or needed. But again, these programs actually improve schools and regional systems WHOLESALE, and universities would complain about the watering down of their real skin-color goal (not fix-the-system goal or help individual-students-goal) and the higher cost in handling more labor-intensive students. Whether all universities including elite universities should even take on or be required (by CRA) to take on that labor-intensive effort is a separate question, but once they decide to do so I'm with Thomas and Scalia that they should be in for the full dollar and a dime savings doesn't justify violating the principle of the 14th Am. The system is designed to churn out masses, and "help" minorities or anyone really. Preferences are a cheap tool to churn out the masses in a more color-friendly way to keep people thinking the Emperor has some clothing on. LaShawn,
I agree generally that most (haven’t found one hat is not … yet) of these non-cog measures are fancy attempts to put easier numbers on skin color, since words like “leadership”, or even “educational benefits” and “diversity,” are inherently so nebulous as to not be measurable. The question then is what is it measuring, and you’re right, the intent is clear.

That said, non-cog measures are in PRINCIPLE (not in practice) not morally objectionable, and some are as precise as test scores. For example, socio-economic criteria can measure “adversity” fairly clearly – but like most other clear measures, as universities argue, it would admit too many other poor non-minorities and water down the intended consequence. Another measure would be test score excellence at a particularly poorly performing school compared to a similar score at a high-performing school – or the creation of “educational empowerment zones” (the reason I don’t reject socio-economic possibilities – because I think simple poverty preferences are no more effective than any other preference) in areas where schools of choice or charters are also predominant or needed. But again, these programs actually improve schools and regional systems WHOLESALE, and universities would complain about the watering down of their real skin-color goal (not fix-the-system goal or help individual-students-goal) and the higher cost in handling more labor-intensive students. Whether all universities including elite universities should even take on or be required (by CRA) to take on that labor-intensive effort is a separate question, but once they decide to do so I’m with Thomas and Scalia that they should be in for the full dollar and a dime savings doesn’t justify violating the principle of the 14th Am.

The system is designed to churn out masses, and “help” minorities or anyone really. Preferences are a cheap tool to churn out the masses in a more color-friendly way to keep people thinking the Emperor has some clothing on.

]]>