Affirmative Action

[toguy5252]

Yes because failing school makes you SUCH a winner. Do you even listen to yourself?

IQ is very highly correlated to academic achievement and is also well correlated to future life success. Again, you're making statements that you very clearly have no idea about. Do you feel comfortable making shit up?

Top psychologist: IQ is the No. 1 predictor of work success

Top psychologist: IQ is the No. 1 predictor of work success—especially combined with these 5 traits

Does a high IQ definitely set you up for more success down the road – be it in terms of career advancement or higher salaries? The answer, essentially, is yes, according to researchers.

www.cnbc.com

Our analysis shows that the early measured IQ is a relatively good predictor of life success in terms of objective indicators.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/20628656

Is IQ a Good Predictor of Success?

Is IQ a Good Predictor of Success?

This question originally appeared on Quora, the best answer to any question. Ask a question, get a great answer. Learn from experts and access insider...

slate.com

As the question is stated, the answer is simply “yes.” If you take a “real” IQ test, then the result is a strong statistical predictor of multiple future life outcomes—income, education level, health, even longevity. There are loads of studies that confirm these correlations.


Oh please feel free to back up your substantive opinion of "Marks are a very poor indicator of future success" . If you can.

Hint; "but I know I guy is not "data". The below chart illustrates a is a very very poor argument.
View attachment 243209



As for spelling? Oh it is very substantive. If you can't spell properly (or even recognize those little red squiggles on the screen), you're an idiot. If you're an idiot, what you say has no meaning. Learn to care about spelling properly. It's the adult thing to do.

As for a professional? A professional has a career, not a job. A professional does not need to belong to a union. A professional ALSO has a governing body to ensure that they meet the standards of that Profession. If they have no governing body, or no independent standards-based body removing their ability to practice their profession, they are not a professional. Professionals understand this. Non-Professionals, sometimes called wannabees, don't understand this.

Let's deal with the idiotic part first . You can create any outcome you like by creating definitions that suit your narrative. Are you seriously suggesting that a teacher does not have a career because they are unionized. Absurd.

IQ is an indicator not because it says something about the prospects of the candidate but because the high test score changes his trajectory and so it becomes self fulfilling. Most iq tests are culturally biased and hence they are relied upon less and less.

Many years ago I was on the hiring committee at the law firm where I was then a partner. Marks were used in order to stream the candidates because we received so many applications. A much bigger criteria was the candidates perceived EQ rather than IQ. There was zero correlation between marks and success. One of my former students is now a judge and he used to joke that he had the lowest LSAT ever recorded.

The management commitee made a decision back then that diversity was good for business and we did recruit with diversity and inclusion as one of many factors. Each of the minority students, without exception, went on to very successful careers.

So instead of spouting platitudes and cliches try dealing in the real world.

 

[DinkleMouse]

As for a professional? A professional has a career, not a job. A professional does not need to belong to a union. A professional ALSO has a governing body to ensure that they meet the standards of that Profession. If they have no governing body, or no independent standards-based body removing their ability to practice their profession, they are not a professional. Professionals understand this. Non-Professionals, sometimes called wannabees, don't understand this.

Pilot isn't a profession, it's a job and pilots aren't professionals. Got it. Same with air traffic controllers, police, firefighters, paramedics. I'm pretty sure there's a big list of "jobs" that pretty much everyone would consider a career and that pretty much everyone would consider professional that your definition doesn't count.

You might want to rethink it.

 

[dirtyharry555]

Awkward: Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action With Affirmative Action Hire Sitting Right There

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an extremely awkward moment, six Supreme Court justices ruled that affirmative action is unconstitutional, completely forgetting that affirmative action hire Ketanji Brown Jackson was sitting right there next to them.

babylonbee.com

LMAO

"Today is a sad day for anyone who was hired strictly based on their race, gender, and sexual orientation rather than qualifications," said White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who was hired strictly based on her race, gender, and sexual orientation rather than qualifications. "Ah, crap... now this is awkward."

Vice President Kamala Harris, also an identity hire with no qualifications, weighed in as well, saying: "Affirmative action is affirmative, and that's good. Without affirmative action, we will have non-affirmative action which is the worst kind of action. And that's bad. HA HA HAHAHAHAHA!"

 

[dirtyharry555]

IQ is an indicator not because it says something about the prospects of the candidate but because the high test score changes his trajectory and so it becomes self fulfilling. Most iq tests are culturally biased and hence they are relied upon less and less.

IQ tests are not culturally biased, and they're relied upon more and more.

They're no longer called IQ tests (because the term IQ has become politically charged), but more and more organizations use third-party companies that provide "aptitude" tests to applicants that measure their IQ.

Many years ago I was on the hiring committee at the law firm where I was then a partner. Marks were used in order to stream the candidates because we received so many applications. A much bigger criteria was the candidates perceived EQ rather than IQ. There was zero correlation between marks and success. One of my former students is now a judge and he used to joke that he had the lowest LSAT ever recorded.

EQ cannot be measured and has no scientific basis. The psychologist who coined EQ said so.

The fact that your judge passed the LSAT is indicative that he had sufficient IQ regardless of his score.

The US military doesn't recruit applicants with an IQ of less than 83 because such folks are incapable of learning and performing the necessary duties of the job. In fact they become a detriment and danger to themselves and others.

 

[toguy5252]

IQ tests are not culturally biased, and they're relied upon more and more.

They're no longer called IQ tests (because the term IQ has become politically charged), but more and more organizations use third-party companies that provide "aptitude" tests to applicants that measure their IQ.



EQ cannot be measured and has no scientific basis. The psychologist who coined EQ said so.

The fact that your judge passed the LSAT is indicative that he had sufficient IQ regardless of his score.

The US military doesn't recruit applicants with an IQ of less than 83 because such folks are incapable of learning and performing the necessary duties of the job. In fact they become a detriment and danger to themselves and others.

You are correct that EQ cannot be scientifically measured but that is the point. It is measured by the interviewer and is based upon the life experiences and personality of the interviewee. It is a much more reliable indicator of success. That is not to say that marks are ignored because they are not. I have never met a HR person relied in IQ testing.

 

[dirtyharry555]

You are correct that EQ cannot be scientifically measured but that is the point. It is measured by the interviewer and is based upon the life experiences and personality of the interviewee. It is a much more reliable indicator of success. That is not to say that marks are ignored because they are not. I have never met a HR person relied in IQ testing.

By the time and interviewee gets to the interview, they've been filtered by IQ.

Beyond that, it's a fit for personality, the culture of the organization, the skills provided by the applicant, and the applicant's ability to articulate themselves. In government and large companies this is done with a panel of interviewers to further remove biases.

 

[toguy5252]

By the time and interviewee gets to the interview, they've been filtered by IQ.

Beyond that, it's a fit for personality, the culture of the organization, the skills provided by the applicant, and the applicant's ability to articulate themselves. In government and large companies this is done with a panel of interviewers to further remove biases.

I have been on those committed. Yes marks are used to filter out certain candidates but marks are not ultimately the determinative factor. If it were the process would be much easier. When you say that "fit" is important and it certainly is you are introducing subjectivity of the interviewer. And human nature being what it is it tends to perpetuate a base which is like "us'. That is the point. We have to break the cycle of us.

 

[Darts]

In Canada, so far, the top programs and the top schools use marks as their primary determination for merit to get into their programs. Waterloo Engineering and Computer Science don't have time to waste with the dummies and those that free-ride on other's work. Not "oh gee, I work at the food bank once a week" and "virtual signal on TERB".

These essays, and the emphasis placed on them, are there solely for white people to feel better that there is 'hope' for them since their kids are failing compared to the successful Asian kids.

A couple of comments

1) Many years ago I was admitted to the Engineering school at McGill. After my first year I said to myself this is really tough stuff and I switched disciplines. McGill doesn't want their engineering grads to design bridges that fall apart.

McGill scrutinizes all your academic achievements. Back then it was PSAT, SAT, IQ, high school marks and matriculation marks. Telling them you are a wokie on social media will earn you a minus.

2) I recently saw a video of an engineering class. At first I thought it was a class in China. It was actually an engineering class at the UofT. Yes, every student in that class was Asian.


U.S. Universities Fall Further Behind China In Production Of STEM PhDs (forbes.com)

 

[Darts]

Law firms are an interesting organization. Academic qualifications are important to a point but being a "rainmaker" is even more important. In many cases a good rainmaker has good family connections and that might be more important than academic qualifications.

BTW: We know at least one major Toronto law firm outsource their legal research to a firm in India.

 

[JohnLarue]

What makes you think I’m using other peoples money?

that's the loonie lefts MO

 

[Darts]

The linked article is 12 years old but I think it is just as true if not more true to-day.
BTW: My university roommate was ethnic Chinese from Singapore.
The enrollment controversy* (macleans.ca)

 

[tiberius6675]

Yes because failing school makes you SUCH a winner. Do you even listen to yourself?

Did you forget that the majority of billionaires are all dropouts? - Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison etc? Marks are not always an indicator of future success.

 

[Darts]

that's the loonie lefts MO

View attachment 243297

President Biden has this brilliant idea you can borrow money and not have to pay it back. Sarcastic.

 

[Darts]

Did you forget that the majority of billionaires are all dropouts? - Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison etc? Marks are not always an indicator of future success.

Not so sure about "majority".

I know both Gates and Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard. I assume their marks, SAT and IQ, etc. must have been good enough to get into Harvard without AA (because they are both white).

Anyway, unless you think you are the next Gates, Zuckerberg, etc. my advice is to get at least an undergrad degree or they'll just throw your resume in the garbage.
You'd Be Surprised How Many Billionaires Don't Have a College Degree | Fortune

 

[JohnLarue]

President Biden has this brilliant idea you can borrow money and not have to pay it back. Sarcastic.

yeah, its pretty ironic that kids should seek a degree stating they have achieved a higher level of education
yet sleepy joe nullifies one of life's more important lessons- assuming responsibility
they signed a legal contract for the student loan & have a responsibility to honor that legal contract

 

[tiberius6675]

Not so sure about "majority".

I know both Gates and Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard. I assume their marks, SAT and IQ, etc. must have been good enough to get into Harvard without AA (because they are both white).

Anyway, unless you think you are the next Gates, Zuckerberg, etc. my advice is to get at least an undergrad degree or they'll just throw your resume in the garbage.
You'd Be Surprised How Many Billionaires Don't Have a College Degree | Fortune

They are outliers for sure, but they are an example of how grades alone don't determine future success.

 

[Nathan 88]

that's the loonie lefts MO

View attachment 243297

I’m neither loony left or wacko, right.
You forgot to quote the rest of my post where I said, I paid for my kids education unlike you who are depending on donors to pay for your kids education.

 

[JohnLarue]

Did you forget that the majority of billionaires are all dropouts? - Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison etc? Marks are not always an indicator of future success.

they are the expectations rather than the rule
drilling down deeper and you will find Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison were all risk takers and posses entrepreneurial drive well in excess of the general public

I believe all three also stumbled upon cash generating opportunities which made further university studies redundant

for the majority, shitty marks is a pretty good indicator of poor future academic success

Most post secondary programs start at a level which assumes full & complete knowledge of the subject matter at the high school level
and the programs move forward at a rapid pace onto more complex concepts which build upon the full & complete knowledge of the subject matter at the high school level

if a student struggles with high school level math, they will get over whelmed in physics, chemistry, engineering, finance, iT programs . etc

 

[tiberius6675]

they are the expectations rather than the rule
drilling down deeper and you will find Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison were all risk takers and posses entrepreneurial drive well in excess of the general public

I believe all three also stumbled upon cash generating opportunities which made further university studies redundant

for the majority, shitty marks is a pretty good indicator of poor future academic success

Most post secondary programs start at a level which assumes full & complete knowledge of the subject matter at the high school level
and the programs move forward at a rapid pace onto more complex concepts which build upon the full & complete knowledge of the subject matter at the high school level

if a student struggles with high school level math, they will get over whelmed in physics, chemistry, engineering, finance, iT programs . etc

It does not have to be poor vs great marks. It could be they score average but go on to be very successful.

 

[JohnLarue]

I’m neither loony left or wacko, right.

your ideologically position on affirmative action indicts otherwise

You forgot to quote the rest of my post where I said, I paid for my kids education

good for you
are you not relieved their acceptance was not bumped by affirmative action applications ?

unlike you who are depending on donors to pay for your kids education.

too funny
a common trait of the loony left is attack character when they run out of factual arguments

full scholarships are more of a USA deal, so not at all relevant to me
although most parents would be very proud if their child receives an academic scholarship
Very proud indeed if their child worked hard and made personnel / social sacrifices usually required to achieve the marks required for an academic scholarship

but in your loony left world, you managed to portray a kid receiving an academic scholarship as a negative
a common trait of the loony left is to find fault everywhere