Red Mosquito

4/5 wrote:My school is currently getting swatted. Police all over the hallways as we all duck and cover in the room.

simple schoolboy wrote:

B wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

I don't understand. That's an article about not proctoring tests and cheating. What does that have to do with racism?

Bammer wrote:

4/5 wrote:My school is currently getting swatted. Police all over the hallways as we all duck and cover in the room.

My first instinct would be to RM, also.

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

I don't understand. That's an article about not proctoring tests and cheating. What does that have to do with racism?

Explains towards the end, the assertion is that the act of not preventing cheating is done to avoid a disparate impact. More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'. This re-enforces the prejudiced belief that students from those groups are not good enough.

Bi_3 wrote:More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'.

4/5 wrote:

Bammer wrote:

4/5 wrote:My school is currently getting swatted. Police all over the hallways as we all duck and cover in the room.

My first instinct would be to RM, also.

Sitting in the dark for 40 minutes with nothing else to do, yanno? It wasn't a drill. Basically somebody called in active shooter reports all over Miami-Dade and Broward County yesterday and succeeded in getting police to swarm schools and swat units brought out. It's a pretty good snapshot of education in America these days, really.

McParadigm wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'.

As a data driven guy, he should be taking solace in the knowledge that, if this is indeed the problem he believes it to be, then UMass will develop a devastating failure/dropout rate and there will shortly be direct, actionable evidence that this system is harmful.

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'.

As a data driven guy, he should be taking solace in the knowledge that, if this is indeed the problem he believes it to be, then UMass will develop a devastating failure/dropout rate and there will shortly be direct, actionable evidence that this system is harmful.

There is little reason to think they will flunk anyone. They will simply be passed and their lack of preparedness will only become noticed when they try to enter the market. Of course, this will be only be interpreted as more actionable evidence that we need more "equity".

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

I don't understand. That's an article about not proctoring tests and cheating. What does that have to do with racism?

Explains towards the end, the assertion is that the act of not preventing cheating is done to avoid a disparate impact. More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'. This re-enforces the prejudiced belief that students from those groups are not good enough.

B wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

I don't understand. That's an article about not proctoring tests and cheating. What does that have to do with racism?

Explains towards the end, the assertion is that the act of not preventing cheating is done to avoid a disparate impact. More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'. This re-enforces the prejudiced belief that students from those groups are not good enough.

So, allowing cheating on math exams is not a viable solution for bias in testing?

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

I don't understand. That's an article about not proctoring tests and cheating. What does that have to do with racism?

Explains towards the end, the assertion is that the act of not preventing cheating is done to avoid a disparate impact. More broadly it allows students to enter into classes (take out loans, pay tuition for, etc.) they are not prepared for creating a scenario where unqualified historically disadvantaged students are set up to fail as a result of 'equity'. This re-enforces the prejudiced belief that students from those groups are not good enough.

So, allowing cheating on math exams is not a viable solution for bias in testing?

No it is not.

4/5 wrote:Did this thread just solve race/woke/education/everything else? I think it did.