California Senate Passes Discrimination Bill SCA-5….

[CDMA ENG]

Signed…

Out of my own self interest…

That being said if you don’t think they are already discriminating Asians you are damn wrong.

They just want to make it legal because it is happening ten of thousands of times a year.

I’ll ping you about this privately to let you know how I know.

My wife also signed.

CE

[joec]

Does anyone else see this possibly back firing in the long term as well? The blurb said:

“and allow the state to use race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin as a consideration for accepting students or hiring employees.”

This means that for any state job as well, if the hiring manager was a racist, they can simply just say, well, he’s black/hispanic/white/jew/nazi/asian, I don’t think I will hire them since I can use race since I already have my 1 token female half-hispanic/.25 asian/.25 black worker…Even if they didn’t have that token worker, I can now legally choose, say not to hire any women in my company or position or discriminate against them legally.

Just seems like a mess when you have some laws to protect these things and this one to throw it all out the window.

Lastly, I never understood why a poor performing kid would even want to go to college/US/State.

If they couldn’t get in already, they’d probably just end up dropping out even if admitted due to the high cost of college and general college course competitiveness…

My views are of course, having lived the graded curved system where 1/3 of the students flunked anyways in engineering.

That said, guv’ment and laws are so lame and stupid. I’ll sign as well.

[CA renter]

Discrimination exists, no matter what. Let’s face it, a “merit-based” system is really discriminating on the basis of I.Q. Some kids can get a 4.0 GPA without even trying, while others will work their asses off just to get a 2.8 GPA. Which one will be the better worker? Which one “deserves” a college education? Which one would benefit most from a college experience?

Nobody “earns” a high I.Q. It is a gift, totally undeserved. Too many people with well above-average intelligence like to pat themselves on the back as if they’ve earned whatever comes to them.

[Coronita]

[quote=CA renter]Discrimination exists, no matter what. Let’s face it, a “merit-based” system is really discriminating on the basis of I.Q. Some kids can get a 4.0 GPA without even trying, while others will work their asses off just to get a 2.8 GPA. Which one will be the better worker? Which one “deserves” a college education? Which one would benefit most from a college experience?

Nobody “earns” a high I.Q. It is a gift, totally undeserved. Too many people with well above-average intelligence like to pat themselves on the back as if they’ve earned whatever comes to them.[/quote]

Wow. Speechless…

I thought you were a teacher before. If that was the case, didn’t you ever notice that the majority of the kids had less to do with raw “high IQ” and more to do with “hard work”..

Sheessh. Wow.. I hope this was sarcasm. Otherwise, thanks for demonstrating how fucked up things are…

[Coronita]

Actually here’s the wrinkle. I’ve been looking at all the demographics of the student body at both the Cal State system and the UC system with a few others… And if you factor in BOTH the Cal State and UC system, hispanics aren’t really severely underrepresented at all.. Just the UC system…. So the bill is flawed to begin with…It’s a not a general “problem” across all colleges in the state…

[SK in CV]

[quote=ltsdd]BTW., if you’re a California HS senior, a 3.5 gpa and a combined 1800 on the SAT will guarantee you a spot at one of the UC Schools.[/quote]

since when, and under what program? I’m reasonably sure that was not true 8 years ago. My daughter had significantly higher grades than that, and she didn’t have any kind of guaranteed admission.

[mike92104]

[quote=CA renter]Discrimination exists, no matter what. Let’s face it, a “merit-based” system is really discriminating on the basis of I.Q. Some kids can get a 4.0 GPA without even trying, while others will work their asses off just to get a 2.8 GPA. Which one will be the better worker? Which one “deserves” a college education? Which one would benefit most from a college experience?

Nobody “earns” a high I.Q. It is a gift, totally undeserved. Too many people with well above-average intelligence like to pat themselves on the back as if they’ve earned whatever comes to them.[/quote]

Jealous much?

[ltsddd]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=ltsdd]BTW., if you’re a California HS senior, a 3.5 gpa and a combined 1800 on the SAT will guarantee you a spot at one of the UC Schools.[/quote]

since when, and under what program? I’m reasonably sure that was not true 8 years ago. My daughter had significantly higher grades than that, and she didn’t have any kind of guaranteed admission.[/quote]

Don’t know exactly when they had this policy. It’s not quite “guaranteed” but it’s as close to a guarantee as you’ll get. I always thought it was top 5%, so somewhat surprised to find out that it’s the top 9%. The 9% is “fixed”, the GPAs and sat scores are not. The numbers I used above is just one possible example to achieve the so-called UC score to be eligible. The link below is where you could find more info:

http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/freshman/california-residents/index.html

[SK in CV]

[quote=ltsdd]
Don’t know exactly when they had this policy. It’s not quite “guaranteed” but it’s as close to a guarantee as you’ll get. I always thought it was top 5%, so somewhat surprised to find out that it’s the top 9%. The 9% is “fixed”, the GPAs and sat scores are not. The numbers I used above is just one possible example to achieve the so-called UC score to be eligible. The link below is where you could find more info:

http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/freshman/california-residents/index.html%5B/quote%5D

Thanks for the link. I think the “statewide path” is new. Or at least it wasn’t as easy to find 8 years ago. The local path did exist, though it used to be the top 10% instead of 9%. When my daughter graduated from TP in ’06, a 4.45 gpa and 1400 on the SAT (that was before the 3 part test was mandatory) wasn’t good enough to rank in the top 10% of her class. Putting that 4.45 gpa in perspective, it’s straight A’s for 4 years and 1 fewer than the maximum possible honors classes at the time. It didn’t make the top 10%.

[scaredyclassic]

Be the best in a crappy school!

[an]

[quote=scaredyclassic]Be the best in a crappy school![/quote]
exactly. Or at least be in they top 9% in a good school instead of 15% in a great school. There are plenty of ways to game the system.

[flyer]

The education aspect is obviously every parent’s concern, but IMO, the more glaring concern I would have if my kids were younger, would be the job market.

Every day, I read another article mentioning that, despite high unemployment, millions of jobs remain open–even those in the $100K++ category–and that number of vacant jobs is expected to grow.

Experts seem to cite the “skills gap,” and mention that “while other nations focus their schools on math, science and problem-solving–coupled with technical training, apprenticeships and cooperative education that places students in real jobs–our country largely chooses multiple-choice testing.”

I’ve seriously wondered about people I know who are forking out $200K+ to educate their kids in fields that have no application in the real world. Seems like a recipe for disappointment for all concerned.

Edit: We’ve actually had friends who stopped talking to everyone after their kid(s) graduated from college, because they couldn’t face the fact that their plans for their kids had failed (no job, no house, etc.) So the career aspect is also a serious consideration.

[CA renter]

[quote=flu][quote=CA renter]Discrimination exists, no matter what. Let’s face it, a “merit-based” system is really discriminating on the basis of I.Q. Some kids can get a 4.0 GPA without even trying, while others will work their asses off just to get a 2.8 GPA. Which one will be the better worker? Which one “deserves” a college education? Which one would benefit most from a college experience?

Nobody “earns” a high I.Q. It is a gift, totally undeserved. Too many people with well above-average intelligence like to pat themselves on the back as if they’ve earned whatever comes to them.[/quote]

Wow. Speechless…

I thought you were a teacher before. If that was the case, didn’t you ever notice that the majority of the kids had less to do with raw “high IQ” and more to do with “hard work”..

Sheessh. Wow.. I hope this was sarcasm. Otherwise, thanks for demonstrating how fucked up things are…[/quote]

No, as a teacher (and a homeschooling mother of three children with widely disparate abilities and work habits), I do NOT believe that high achievers get to the top by sheer work and willpower. Not even close. Most kids who are top performers are gifted in some way, and it’s their innate abilities and the (relative) ease with which they can accomplish academic tasks and challenges that fuels their drive to push forward.

[CA renter]

[quote=mike92104][quote=CA renter]Discrimination exists, no matter what. Let’s face it, a “merit-based” system is really discriminating on the basis of I.Q. Some kids can get a 4.0 GPA without even trying, while others will work their asses off just to get a 2.8 GPA. Which one will be the better worker? Which one “deserves” a college education? Which one would benefit most from a college experience?

Nobody “earns” a high I.Q. It is a gift, totally undeserved. Too many people with well above-average intelligence like to pat themselves on the back as if they’ve earned whatever comes to them.[/quote]

Jealous much?[/quote]

Not at all. I was a gifted student. It’s because of this that I know how “easy” it is for people with higher I.Q.s to accomplish so much academically. There are so many families out there with one gifted child and others who are average or somewhat above-average. Oftentimes, those “average” kids work many times as hard as the more gifted child…but cannot compete academically. I’ve seen countless highly gifted students who were the laziest creatures on earth because they were used to everything being easy for them, but they were always able to outperform on academic tests.

The research bears this out, too. There is a very strong correlation between IQ and student achievement, especially on standardized tests.

———–

In a recent study, multiple measures of
g were used to predict group administered standardized national public examination results across 25 academic subjects (Deary,
Strand, Smith, & Fernandes, 2007). The correlation between a latent g factor measured at age 11 and a latent general educational achievement factor measured at age 16 was 0.81.
A longitudinal coefficient as substantial as .81 is remarkably high and suggests that the latent
g and academic achievement constructs might approach identity when assessed con-
currently. Other studies have found that the average IQ of a nation is highly correlated with the academic achievement
of that nation (Lynn & Meisenberg, 2010; Rindermann, 2007). Looking at differences in IQ across 86 countries, Lynn
and Meisenberg (2010) found a correlation of .92 between a nation’s measured IQ and the educational attainment of school students in math, science and reading comprehension.
Correcting for attenuation, they found a correlation of 1.0.

http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Kaufman-et-al.-2012.pdf

[flyer]

My wife is an extremely gifted individual, as are two of our children, so we have been down the road of which you speak.

One study she said she would like to see more research on would be the correlation between “giftedness” and life achievement. She feels that would tell us more about how well these individuals, as a whole, actually perform in the real world.

If you know of any such research, please post the links.

[Author]

Posts