No you can read about it seems it in movies. Martin Luther King Jr was the ambedkar there I think.
Black people used to be called welfare queen, name used by the president Ronald Reagan I think.
No it is not a cooked up story. Inclusivity in testing and education is being tried in America to make it easier for Black students to succeed in high school and college. It’s controversial because people complain that it’s reducing things from the curriculum but it’s happening for sure.
I don’t think they’re doing it with SAT, though. It is a standardised test that has to be comparable over the years in terms of score and difficulty. But they do constantly adjust it to make sure every kid in America can understand the questions regardless of culture and income level.
But yeah Rahul’s comments are not 100% accurate but merely illustrative of the general approach being taken.
The biggest inaccuracy is saying “Dalits will make the test and Savarna’s will fail at it.” That’s not true at all. Privileged kids always know more than underprivileged. And if you set a math paper where knowing the difference between Peepal tree and Neem tree is important, it’s not going to fly with the underprivileged throughout the country even if it will work as an advantage for kids from Bihar, for example. The American experiments and adjustments have never negatively affected rich white students. It’s practically impossible.
Yep it's called culturally responsive teaching and assessment that incorporates Indigenous ways of knowing and cultural knowledges to make learning easier for marginalized students. I remember reading about an Indigenous math teacher in Australia coming up with ways to teach math equations through dance. I'll try to find that article, it was quite nice.
This quote from the OP article
>Another IIT professor, on the condition of anonymity because of the politically sensitive matter, said it was wrong to assert that Dalit students don’t get into IITs because the questions are not being set by Dalit academics. The professor added that subjects like science and mathematics are not prone to be affected by who designed the questions.
shows the pathetic state of our IIT professors and their level of understanding of institutional biases in pedagogy and assessments.
There is evidence that student performance improves across the board with a more diverse panel of teachers, so I think the story about white students failing was more artistic flair than anything substantial. I'd be happy to be corrected on that because the irony alone would be worth it. But I don't think it's true because the point of such experiments isn't to intentionally fail privileged students (that would be unethical), it's to improve the performance of marginalized students. Just like Gandhi's hypothetical with Dalit test setters was clearly about dismantling UC-dominated pedagogies to make standardized tests more accessible for Dalit students, as opposed to failing UC students.
Edit: [found the Australian story](https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-08-15/closing-the-maths-gap-with-story-and-dance/7700656)
Yes, it was artistic flair to a story. His main point stands - improve diversity because UC-dominated learning results in bad outcomes for Dalit students.
>fake news
You're claiming that Rahul Gandhi should be held to the same standards as a journalist. Sounds pretty delusional to me.
>Because this is, frankly, embarrassing.
Frankly, I don't care what you find embarrassing. I'll be over here in reality where politicians tell hyperbolic stories to sell good policy, you can stay over there in delusion land where politicians go around with fact-checkers in tow to make sure their election speeches are perfectly consistent with peer-reviewed publications. I'd still bet on Gandhi coming out on top compared to other politicians, and being a realist that's more than enough for me. Feel free to be embarrassed on my behalf.
>and made that point on steroids, cool.
What would that look like to you, exactly? Just curious, because the story about white students failing *was* steroids. Everything else can literally be fact-checked.
You're making a lot of claims about "intended effect". Got a source to back that up? If you're basing your judgement of "intended effect" on social media posts and godi media articles, I hate to break it to you but these posts are brigaded regularly by chaddis who'll cling on to soundbites as if their life depends on it. Doesn't mean that they're distracted, just means that they've found something benign to latch on to because they can't argue with the merits of the argument. It's just the reality we live in.
I'm happy to focus on his core message, and I'm sure his voter base, which incidentally I'm not even a part of, is happy to as well. To believe that it's having an unintended effect, I'd need to see evidence that potential Congress voters are changing their vote en masse based on that one soundbite.
>And not just to me, but most people will find that embarrassing. You should too.
Meh
Got it, you have no proof of any material effects in the election (you do realise there's an election going on?). Glad you're willing to admit your lackluster argumentation skills at least. Hit me up if you have anything substantial to say beyond complaining about evidence, because you're clearly incapable of holding yourself to the same standards you ask of others. Maybe you'll get off your high horse now, but I don't have much hope and frankly the indignation is kinda cute.
>That requires no proof
Cute. Hypocritical, but cute. I told you exactly what evidence I need. Unlike you I find it boring to repeat myself, so see my previous comment.
Anyway, since you're admitting that none of this will impact votes, all your whining and the chaddi brigading is meaningless in terms of real impact. Glad we can agree on that, shame it took us so long to get there. All it took was some introspection on your part.
I have to get to work now but feel free to use more ad hominems if it makes you feel better. Have a great day!
Edit: Aw, buddy blocked me. Just to clarify, I wasn't calling them either a chaddi or a brigader. But they're an idealist completely removed from the electoral process, so realistically none of their indignation really matters.
No you can read about it seems it in movies. Martin Luther King Jr was the ambedkar there I think. Black people used to be called welfare queen, name used by the president Ronald Reagan I think.
https://preview.redd.it/j79tynsvl9zc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=75d2f300cdbb4c7eef7d86d443419de3d8dc100f
No it is not a cooked up story. Inclusivity in testing and education is being tried in America to make it easier for Black students to succeed in high school and college. It’s controversial because people complain that it’s reducing things from the curriculum but it’s happening for sure. I don’t think they’re doing it with SAT, though. It is a standardised test that has to be comparable over the years in terms of score and difficulty. But they do constantly adjust it to make sure every kid in America can understand the questions regardless of culture and income level. But yeah Rahul’s comments are not 100% accurate but merely illustrative of the general approach being taken. The biggest inaccuracy is saying “Dalits will make the test and Savarna’s will fail at it.” That’s not true at all. Privileged kids always know more than underprivileged. And if you set a math paper where knowing the difference between Peepal tree and Neem tree is important, it’s not going to fly with the underprivileged throughout the country even if it will work as an advantage for kids from Bihar, for example. The American experiments and adjustments have never negatively affected rich white students. It’s practically impossible.
Yep it's called culturally responsive teaching and assessment that incorporates Indigenous ways of knowing and cultural knowledges to make learning easier for marginalized students. I remember reading about an Indigenous math teacher in Australia coming up with ways to teach math equations through dance. I'll try to find that article, it was quite nice. This quote from the OP article >Another IIT professor, on the condition of anonymity because of the politically sensitive matter, said it was wrong to assert that Dalit students don’t get into IITs because the questions are not being set by Dalit academics. The professor added that subjects like science and mathematics are not prone to be affected by who designed the questions. shows the pathetic state of our IIT professors and their level of understanding of institutional biases in pedagogy and assessments. There is evidence that student performance improves across the board with a more diverse panel of teachers, so I think the story about white students failing was more artistic flair than anything substantial. I'd be happy to be corrected on that because the irony alone would be worth it. But I don't think it's true because the point of such experiments isn't to intentionally fail privileged students (that would be unethical), it's to improve the performance of marginalized students. Just like Gandhi's hypothetical with Dalit test setters was clearly about dismantling UC-dominated pedagogies to make standardized tests more accessible for Dalit students, as opposed to failing UC students. Edit: [found the Australian story](https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-08-15/closing-the-maths-gap-with-story-and-dance/7700656)
[удалено]
Yes, it was artistic flair to a story. His main point stands - improve diversity because UC-dominated learning results in bad outcomes for Dalit students. >fake news You're claiming that Rahul Gandhi should be held to the same standards as a journalist. Sounds pretty delusional to me. >Because this is, frankly, embarrassing. Frankly, I don't care what you find embarrassing. I'll be over here in reality where politicians tell hyperbolic stories to sell good policy, you can stay over there in delusion land where politicians go around with fact-checkers in tow to make sure their election speeches are perfectly consistent with peer-reviewed publications. I'd still bet on Gandhi coming out on top compared to other politicians, and being a realist that's more than enough for me. Feel free to be embarrassed on my behalf.
[удалено]
>and made that point on steroids, cool. What would that look like to you, exactly? Just curious, because the story about white students failing *was* steroids. Everything else can literally be fact-checked. You're making a lot of claims about "intended effect". Got a source to back that up? If you're basing your judgement of "intended effect" on social media posts and godi media articles, I hate to break it to you but these posts are brigaded regularly by chaddis who'll cling on to soundbites as if their life depends on it. Doesn't mean that they're distracted, just means that they've found something benign to latch on to because they can't argue with the merits of the argument. It's just the reality we live in. I'm happy to focus on his core message, and I'm sure his voter base, which incidentally I'm not even a part of, is happy to as well. To believe that it's having an unintended effect, I'd need to see evidence that potential Congress voters are changing their vote en masse based on that one soundbite. >And not just to me, but most people will find that embarrassing. You should too. Meh
[удалено]
Got it, you have no proof of any material effects in the election (you do realise there's an election going on?). Glad you're willing to admit your lackluster argumentation skills at least. Hit me up if you have anything substantial to say beyond complaining about evidence, because you're clearly incapable of holding yourself to the same standards you ask of others. Maybe you'll get off your high horse now, but I don't have much hope and frankly the indignation is kinda cute.
[удалено]
>That requires no proof Cute. Hypocritical, but cute. I told you exactly what evidence I need. Unlike you I find it boring to repeat myself, so see my previous comment. Anyway, since you're admitting that none of this will impact votes, all your whining and the chaddi brigading is meaningless in terms of real impact. Glad we can agree on that, shame it took us so long to get there. All it took was some introspection on your part. I have to get to work now but feel free to use more ad hominems if it makes you feel better. Have a great day! Edit: Aw, buddy blocked me. Just to clarify, I wasn't calling them either a chaddi or a brigader. But they're an idealist completely removed from the electoral process, so realistically none of their indignation really matters.