[quote=CA renter][quote=ocrenter][quote=AN]I never understand the mindset of people like CAR. They’re so willing to give disadvantaged teens a leg up at the university level, yet they vehemently oppose giving the same disadvantaged kids a leg up at the elementary/middle/high school level. If they’re so inclined to have quotas at the University level, why not do the same for the elementary/middle/high school level?[/quote]
Because now it interferes with the unions, which has a lock on secondary schools.
It is ok to push the Asians aside at the college level to satisfy that guilt about disadvantaged minorities (no union members were hurt in the process). But it is not ok to make actual reform that makes a difference because union toes would be step upon.[/quote]
It has nothing at all to do with unions, and I don’t think anyone wants to “push aside” any group of students, either. That’s not the focus of Affirmative Action (which, as I’ve pointed out, I’m opposed to…I’m just trying to explain the thought process of those who advocate for it).
People who push for the preferential treatment of certain disadvantaged minorities do so out of a concern for fairness. The circumstances into which one is born (SES status, IQ, etc.) are no more the fault of the child than the color of their skin. When you insist on admitting students that simply have a higher IQ, then you are “pushing aside” the students who don’t. Either way, someone is being pushed aside due to circumstances that are beyond their control. So, while you might think that discriminating based on IQ (and, usually, family resources) is more “fair,” others think that trying to help those who have had a more difficult childhood and/or are born with a lower IQ is more fair. IMO, there is no right or wrong, it’s just a matter of different perspectives.[/quote]
While fairness is important, the point is promoting someone with lesser ability (IQ or academic) into an environment they are not equipped to excel in ultimately leads to their undoing.
