Comment by anu7df | Hacker News Reader

Comment by anu7df | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Ok.. I am going to be brave and not going to use a throwaway. I find it perplexing that HN crowd who is usually arguing for a balanced analysis and seeing both viewpoints is suddenly behaving as if this data proves some injustice is currently happening in India as well as US (in the context of Indian caste system). To be clear, India has/had a caste system that was extremely oppressive. Currently though, the social aspects aside, economically and crucially educationally, the "lower castes", have an advantage due to a system of reservations - affirmative action on steroids. I am not going to argue one way or the other as to whether the idea or the implementation of such an affirmative action policy is fair or net positive. It probably still is in principle, but in practice the people who seem to benefit from this, in my experience, are very rich "lower caste" families. More things to say here, but I don't want to digress. The law suit in the story has to do with IIT. So let's take that specifically. IIT is extremely competitive to get into. It is even more competitive once you are in. It is common for affirmative action students to not do very well there. Call it a difference grit/talent/smartness whatever. This causes a some of them to disengage from studies altogether. Then it is not a stretch to imagine that some of them may not be very good at their job either. The lawsuit and the accusations of casteism has to be now taken with a huge pinch of salt. To be clear, I don't know if any of the accusations in that lawsuit are true or not. But I do know that every middle class parent (including mine) drills into their kids the idea that you have to work freaking hard at studies to "get some where". Everything about that 90 percent statistic can be explained through economics (already rich with all its advantages) or through desperation (high caste+ poor => no chance except if you work really hard). Of course I knew a few so called "lower caste" people in IIT who got in through the "general category" ie purely on merit. They were just as good as anybody there and are also doing well in the tech scene in US. edit: Added the below sentence.

The cynic in me thinks this guy accuser in the lawsuit is trying to hide his incompetence by taking advantage of the BLM and current sentiments.

> It is common for affirmative action students to not do very well there.

Do you have any data at all for this?

> Then it is not a stretch to imagine that some of them may not be very good at their job either.

It's not right to assume that someone may not be good at their current job because they may (in your mind) have benefited from some "affirmative action" program far in the past (John Doe is 20+ years into his career). Judge people on current performance, not past history. Plenty of average students shine in the real world.

> The cynic in me thinks this guy accuser in the lawsuit is trying to hide his incompetence

Why don't we let the courts work it out instead of speculating on people's motivations or honesty?

This example from Thomas Sowell refers to affirmative action in the US rather than in India, but seems relevant https://www.pe.com/2015/12/17/thomas-sowell-mismatching-stud...

>I became painfully aware of this problem more than 40 years ago, when I was teaching at Cornell University and discovered that half the black students there were on some form of academic probation.

>These students were not stupid or uneducable. On the contrary, the average black student at Cornell at that time scored at the 75th percentile on scholastic tests. Their academic qualifications were better than those of three-quarters of all American students who took those tests.

>The average white student would have been wiped out at Cornell. But the average white student was unlikely to be admitted to Cornell, in the first place. Nor was a white student who scored at the 75th percentile.

>That was a “favor” reserved for black students. This favor turned black students who would have been successful at most American colleges and universities into failures at Cornell.

>None of this was peculiar to Cornell. Black students who scored at the 90th percentile in math had serious academic problems trying to keep up at M.I.T., where other students scored somewhere within the top 99th percentile.

>There were other fine engineering schools around the country where those same students could have learned more, when taught at a normal pace, rather than at a breakneck speed geared to students with extremely rare abilities in math.

> This favor turned black students who would have been successful at most American colleges and universities into failures at Cornell.

Data is still missing! This is just conjecturing that they're just not smart enough, which is incredible crap to me.

Anyone who went to college that had extenuating circumstances with their family or money rarely does well, regardless of how the school let them in. I knew all the kids around me at college who had to work to pay for rent/school/family etc because they wouldn't have time to come to any of our study halls, group work, labs, office hours, etc. They all suffered regardless of race, but you guessed it, somehow most of the latinx and black students had jobs, and somehow most of the white, chinese and indian students did not.

Unless there is some data that shows people of "average" intelligence cannot succeed at Cornell, I think we can guess that having an extra 20-40 hours/week of labor affects your grades than some classist "smartness".

> It is common for affirmative action students to not do very well there. Do you have any data at all for this?

You can find one study here https://www.epw.in/engage/article/Survey-at-an-IIT-Campus-Sh....

General category has a higher percentage of attended govt school and less private school than SC/ST. Interesting to see that is not true for OBC.

It would be great but surprising if it were the other way. If you have difficult entry examinations but allow any group with lower marks to enter, then (if the exam is not fully detached from the requirements of the course) this group is likely to do worse. The skills and knowledge you build on mattet usually.

I think the only way to really have affirmative action is to give extra high qualoty training to the group you want to help starting 2 years before the entrance examination. (and no extra points then)

> It is common for affirmative action students to not do very well there. Do you have any data at all for this?

No. Only my observation from when I went to IIT for my undergrad about 2 decades ago. At that time they even used to have remedial classes for students who came in through the reservation system. Again, I would like to emphasize that not all of those students were having difficulties coping with the workload. In fact, it is not uncommon for the general category students to crumble under pressure as well.

> Then it is not a stretch to imagine that some of them may not be very good at their job either.

It's not right to assume that someone may not be good at their current job because they may (in your mind) have benefited from some "affirmative action" program far in the past (John Doe is 20+ years into his career). Judge people on current performance, not past history. Plenty of average students shine in the real world.

Yes, plenty of average students shine in the real world. Nothing you say here contradicts what I wrote above. To rephrase with an example, if GPA was the only criteria for accepting students into a university, and in a class of mostly 4.0 students you admit a few 2.0 students with affirmative action, it is not difficult to see how they would have trouble in class. If they also get demotivated and end up not getting much from that education, some of them may not do so well in work life either.* > The cynic in me thinks this guy accuser in the lawsuit is trying to hide his incompetence

Why don't we let the courts work it out instead of speculating on people's motivations or honesty?

Agreed. That was uncalled for. But I did preface it with "cynic in me".

> they even used to have remedial classes for students who came in through the reservation... it is not uncommon for the general category students to crumble under pressure as well.

So it sounds like IIT is generally a tough place to study at, regardless of how you get in. Surely you would agree that how someone got in isn't really relevant after they've been working for 2 decades?

> in a class of mostly 4.0 students you admit a few 2.0 students with affirmative action, it is not difficult to see how they would have trouble in class. If they also get demotivated and end up not getting much from that education, some of them may not do so well in work life either.

Again, you're making a lot of assumptions. I can argue the other way too - people for whom studies go easy don't learn to work hard. Because of their high GPA and belief in their own intelligence, they may act in an arrogant, entitled, prima-donna-ish way and may not do so well in work life where they have to deal with others. (I don't believe this, I'm just pointing out the problem with making assumptions like you're doing).

You don't know why those "2.0 students" struggled. Maybe it was the first time they studied at an institution with such high standards. Maybe they felt an undercurrent of hostility from their classmates who thought they're not worthy of being there and that affected them mentally.

Look at the present state of things. Don't try to extrapolate from incomplete evidence from a long time ago.

I am not sure why you are arguing. I did not say I know the circumstances of this particular situation. I am not making any claims about the ability of any student to learn and do well in any course. All I am saying is that throwing a bunch of under prepared students into the fire, potentially judged for every action, mistake or attempt to learn is a tough situation to be in. Under these circumstances at least a few people would get demotivated to an extent that would affect their future trajectory in life. It has been shown (in the context of school children) that if everyone around you including the teachers think you are good, you tend to do better than you would otherwise. The opposite would result in worse outcomes is not then a huge surprise. Again I am speaking generally, not saying anything about any particular person's circumstance. What are you disagreeing with here?

> Again I am speaking generally, not saying anything about any particular person's circumstance. What are you disagreeing with here?

I'm disagreeing with the whole idea of generalizations. When it comes to people, no generalizations work. You have to look at what's in front of you, rather than what you believe there should be based on what you think their past is.

RE: the cynic in you: You saw the hole, but you fell into it anyways, it’s just a habit. The hole I fall in is giving people advice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portia_Nelson#Writing

Reply on news.ycombinator.com