[ExI] Well-roundedness and character

[Dan TheBookMan]

On Jun 4, 2020, at 7:56 AM, John Clark via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> 
> The University of California system has permanently banned SAT and ACT test results from being a factor in deciding who will be admitted to their Universities. It's likely many other Universities in the US will follow this lead. They said they did it because standardized testing is racially biased due to the fact that rich white people can hire tutors to help their kids score high on the tests but poor black kids can't. So from now on admission will be based on subjective qualities like "well-roundedness" and "character". Apparently the ability to kick a ball on a field or play water polo in a pool or row a boat in a river shows great well-roundedness and character.
> 
> I agree with Quantum Computer expert Scott Aaronson when he said:  
> 
> "As a result, admissions to the top US universities—and hence, most chances for social advancement in the US—will henceforth be based entirely on shifting and nebulous criteria that rich, well-connected kids and their parents spend most of their lives figuring out, rather than merely mostly based on such criteria. The last side door for smart nonconformist kids is now being slammed shut."
> 
> Aaronson says if such a polacy had been in place when he was a kid he would have never been admitted to any university much less gone to graduate school and gotten a Phd.

Regarding higher education, isn't there already a baked in unfairness in that the poorer members of the tax base pay for basically upper middle class kids to go to these schools? I mean it's sort of like a light rail system. Sure, poor people can pay the fare, but it's mainly built for upper middle class people and generally goes to and from where they want to go. Buses would be much cheaper than a light rail, but then that would serve the poorer members of society better -- and the poor, generally, don't organize and vote, aren't much of a threat to the elite.

(Any elite to stay on top have to recognize the biggest threat are those who can and do organize and are likely to oust them. So the prizes are there to offset these threats. I'm not saying this is always a conscious policy. It's more Darwinian: elites that don't disrupt or co-opt internal threats will be replaced sooner or later.)

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200604/c01afa2d/attachment.htm>