Hacker News Reader

Comment by diamondcutter | Hacker News Reader

Standardized testing is hugely influenced by unfair factors. Like the fact that if I'm rich, I can pay for my kids to get better tutoring which boosts scores by hundreds of points. Or the fact that stereotype threat may keep minorities from doing well on tests. Or that tests can be culturally biased against people from certain backgrounds.

View on HN

So instead of giving these positions to the people most qualified and capable of making the most out of them based on the metrics we have chosen to measure success. We should give them to people because of their upbringing or gonads? Regardless if they are the most qualified person to fill that position?

So the student (let's call them Sally) was afforded a better education, and using their superior knowledge are more qualified for a position. So Sally should be told "Sorry, this spot is being given to Sam because they are an ethnic minority."?

Remind me how that is fair for Sally and not benevolent racism towards Sam?

I don't care. Our goal should not be to equalize rewards to effort, but match talent to opportunity. It doesn't matter where that talent comes from. Trying to account for these "unfair factors" is itself hugely unfair, creates perverse outcomes, and in the end, reinforces our biases instead of eradicate them. Even if you begin these measures with the best intentions, they decay to favoritism and resentment. Fair testing has legitimacy. Your ad-hoc patches do not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com