Hacker News Reader

Comment by yummyfajitas | Hacker News Reader

In previous years these results have been driven primarily by African Americans and Hispanics (groups which don't exist to any significant degree in Europe or Asia) dragging the US average down. European Americans do very well when compared to European nations, and Asian Americans do well when compared to Asian nations (a bit worse in math, better in reading).

http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-abou... http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-...

Do we have any reason to believe that situation has changed? (I haven't read the latest report, so I don't know.)

View on HN

> In previous years these results have been driven primarily by African Americans and Hispanics (groups which don't exist to any significant degree in Europe or Asia)

There aren't many Hispanics in Europe...?

Spanish speaking whites in Spain aren't "Hispanic" in the American sense (ethnically indian or mestizo from Central and South American regions that were colonized by Spain).

Oddly enough, there aren't that many (statistically significant) African Americans anywhere outside of America either... :)

Yes, I should have more carefully stated that the correct category for comparison would be non-immigrant Europeans of African descent. Which is a very small fraction of the population.

Errr.... no?

I've never heard it used to refer to someone from actually from Spain.

Hispanic refers to Hispania, the Roman name for the Iberian Peninsula.

Thus, Spain and Portugal are the two original Hispanic cultures. Any culture that has Hispanic roots (i.e. most countries south of the US) is also Hispanic.

Anecdotally, a friend of mine was a first generation Spanish immigrant, and won a college scholarship aimed at Hispanic immigrants.

That's the point. Americans don't usually call Spaniards and Portuguese "Hispanic" any more then they call a Blond haired, blue eyed person born in America, but who's parents were born in South Africa "African American", which is to say rarely and usually in a comedic or anecdotal manner.

When he's referring to "Hispanics and African Americans" he is trying to refer to specific "racial" (insomuch as the concept exists) groups.

Yes, and nfg and I are trying to point out the downsides of using the term "Hispanic" when you mean "Latin American". The terms aren't interchangeable, even though people might try to treat them as such.

It might be an academic distinction to you, but it isn't to everybody. On the flip side of your example, while teaching in an inner city, I broke up a fight that started because a kid called a Haitian "African American".

You and I are agreeing while we explain this state of affairs to nfg, which is why I've been upvoting you.

It's far from an academic distinction to me, and that fight could have just as easily occurred if an African American had been called a Haitian, or any number of similar errors...

Just out of curiosity, what is the relevance of this observation?

Are you saying that nations are irrelevant, and ethnicity is what really matters? Is this a subtle entreaty to focus the brunt of America's educational efforts on specific ethnic subgroups so that the entire nation can have better results?

Instead of blindly downvoting, I really am interested in the point of this statement.

The point is that whatever trait drags the US average performance down probably lives in the student body rather than the school system.

If so, there isn't a lot we can do about it.

Quite the pessimist!

So you're going w/ B) A subtle entreaty to focus the brunt of America's educational efforts on specific ethnic subgroups so that the entire nation can have better results. The upside is that it's possible that whatever procedural improvements are made will probably improve all of the student body, so it's a win-win!

Unless, of course, you're also positing that these sub-groups can't be taught??

So you're going w/ B) A subtle entreaty to focus the brunt of America's educational efforts on specific ethnic subgroups...

Unless you can demonstrate that this is cost effective, I'm certainly not.

And yes, I do generally posit that most educational interventions are ineffective. If you disagree, please point to one which can reliably and scalably increase the score of any group by an amount proportional to the black/white (or white/asian) gap.

Ok....

So are you saying that the current methods of education can't be improved?

I'm not referring to an intervention, which, like dieting, will not be useful in the long term. I'm giving you credit for hitting upon the idea that education itself can be altered in a manner which is not only far more effective, but evenly distributed improvements across all tested populations.

That's a great idea, and we all look forward to hearing of your progress in this endeavor.

For me, that intuitively fits with other stats I have seen. IIRC, the U.S. was being reported as number six in the world for average income. But when broken down by ethnicity, white Americans placed number one. African Americans placed something like 49th. Hispanic Americans were a few notches lower than African Americans.

(I hesitate to post this out of concern it sounds "racist". I am sure the reasons for this pattern are complex.)

facts know no ethnicity

Maybe you should acquaint yourself with a book called "How to lie with statistics". In a biased environment, there are lots of ways to harm with innuendo (and similar) and then claim no such thing was intended while continuing to deepen the damage, often intentionally and maliciously, sometimes obliviously.

(But have an upvote. I am pretty sure your intent was to be supportive.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com