|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:50 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Take it up with Uncle Sam, then. |
If a representative of our government were here now, I would do so gladly. Because you -- rather than a representative of our government -- are the one here claiming Hispanic "Origin" is determined by surname alone, I'm taking it up with you.
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Because they are keen observers of human behavior. I guarantee you they would applaud Greg's dirty trick as the right thing to do. Not the honest thing to do, but virtuous. |
Well, thank you for your speculation of what long dead men might say and think regarding our discussion were they here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Take it up with Uncle Sam, then. |
If a representative of our government were here now, I would do so gladly. Because you -- rather than a representative of our government -- are the one here claiming Hispanic "Origin" is determined by surname alone, I'm taking it up with you. |
I don't have a definition. Or at least not a "perfect" one. My definition --- if I could think one up --- would be irrelevant. And so would yours. I merely state what I believe to be the US government's definition and, for the moment, it seems an Hispanic surname will satisfy the US government's requirements.
Sorry I can't make you understand that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Take it up with Uncle Sam, then. |
If a representative of our government were here now, I would do so gladly. Because you -- rather than a representative of our government -- are the one here claiming Hispanic "Origin" is determined by surname alone, I'm taking it up with you. |
I don't have a definition. My definition --- if I could think one up --- would be irrelevant. |
And yet you stated that he's Hispanic. Not that the United States government thinks he is, but that he is. You also stated that he is not scamming the system, which also requires him to be Hispanic.
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| And so would yours. |
And yet, you asked me for my definition more than once. Why, if it's irrelevent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
And yet you stated that he's Hispanic. Not that the United States government thinks he is, but that he is. You also stated that he is not scamming the system, which also requires him to be Hispanic.
|
If the government is satisfied, then I am satisfied. If you are not then it falls on you to say why, not me. Don't you think so?
| Fox wrote: |
| And yet, you asked me for my definition more than once. Why, if it's irrelevent? |
I believed your position to be irrelevant from the beginning, since the US has its own guidelines. And they really don't check in on this website.
But if you want to replace their wisdom with your own, don't you think you ought to at least say what it is? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
And yet you stated that he's Hispanic. Not that the United States government thinks he is, but that he is. You also stated that he is not scamming the system, which also requires him to be Hispanic.
|
If the government is satisfied, then I am satisfied. If you are not then it falls on you to say why, not me. Don't you think so? |
And I've all ready said why, repeatedly: because Cordova himself made it clear he's not. I understand you can't accept that, because it would render invalid and meaningless everything you've said thus far, but it's the case.
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| And yet, you asked me for my definition more than once. Why, if it's irrelevent? |
I believed your position to be irrelevant from the beginning, since the US has its own guidelines.
But if you want to replace their wisdom with your own, don't you think you ought to say what it is? No matter what I may think about it. |
With someone discussing in good faith and with a genuine interest in the topic at hand, I'd happily discuss it. With you, not so much; I'm content to limit myself to what my case requires here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| And I've all ready said why, repeatedly: because Cordova himself made it clear he's not. I understand you can't accept that, because it would render invalid and meaningless everything you've said thus far, but it's the case. |
The government's definition, being so broad and flimsy, to them Cordova is Hispanic. And since I'm against AA how can I not applaud Cordova's action?
| Fox wrote: |
| With someone discussing in good faith and with a genuine interest in the topic at hand, I'd happily discuss it. With you, not so much; I'm content to limit myself to what my case requires here. |
It's OK if you have no accurate definition of Hispanic. Uncle Sam doesn't seem to have one either. You claim to have a better one. Why not say what it is? Or is it "bad faith" to ask? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| And I've all ready said why, repeatedly: because Cordova himself made it clear he's not. I understand you can't accept that, because it would render invalid and meaningless everything you've said thus far, but it's the case. |
The government's definition, being so broad and flimsy, to them Cordova is Hispanic. And since I'm against AA how can I not applaud Cordova's action? |
You can avoid applauding Cordova's action quite easily using this simple formula:
1) I, Mr. Cheswyck, am against Affirmative Action.
2) Cordova's actions involve benefitting from Affirmative Action.
2) I, Mr. Cheswyck, am against Cordova's actions.
Remember, at this point in the discussion you're arguing Cordova is nothing more than someone legitimately benefitting from Affirmative Action. If you're really against Affirmative Action, why on Earth would you applaud his actions?
| Fox wrote: |
| Why not say what it is? |
Because, again, my case doesn't require it. Further, you yourself have labelled it as irrelevent.
Ask again, get the same answer again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
You can avoid applauding Cordova's action quite easily using this simple formula:
1) I, Mr. Cheswyck, am against Affirmative Action.
2) Cordova's actions involve benefitting from Affirmative Action.
2) I, Mr. Cheswyck, am against Cordova's actions.
|
I rephrase: "How can I resist applauding..."
He not only neutralized the weapon that was sent out to defeat him, he turned in his favor. You gotta love that!
Yes, I agree it would be better AA not exist. But it does, and the man dealt.
You're all debating team on this. And on logic there, Mr. Spock, you're gonna win. I bow to your superior logic. I do. But the real world needs a Captain Kirk. And Mr. Cordova is that Captain Kirk.
I feel we've run our course here. Or at least I have.
We kept our punches above the waist.
I've enjoyed it, my worthy opponent.
Perhaps we'll continue, perhaps not.
Until then amigo, adios. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alas, yet another CE forum thread gets unraveled by a tit-for-tat never to become a rolling ball of yarn again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
...But the Court avoided the more basic question raised by the case: Why was the exam being discussed in terms of race and discrimination at all?
The New York Times�s Supreme Court reporter, Linda Greenhouse, wrote in an op-ed that the exam �appeared to favor white test-takers.� It did nothing of the sort. It merely favored those who had studied hard and prepared themselves to become captains and lieutenants. But we have been conditioned by the decades-long reign of disparate-impact theory, which the black firefighters would have used in a potential suit against New Haven, to discuss neutral employment practices in racial terms and to entertain the idea that the expectation of moderate cognitive performance is an unfair imposition on blacks.
Arguments offered by New Haven against its own promotional test�embraced, disturbingly, by nearly half of the Supreme Court�demonstrate how desperate the search for bias has become. New Haven pointed out that the exam asked test takers to show �how they would address a particular problem [by] verbally saying it or identifying the correct option on a written test,� in the words of a rival test developer; the city�s implication was that any expectation that someone be able to use language to express ideas would be unfair to blacks. New Haven also objected that the test�s final results were based on a 60�40 weighting of a written and an oral exam, a formula that the department had used for two decades. This objection is purely ad hoc; had the weighting been 40�60, the race advocates would have been just as adamant that it was unfair. Nothing in the record suggests that a different weighting would have changed the pass rate. New Haven�s general counsel further complained that the exam tested the �ability to memorize textbooks but not necessarily to identify solutions to real problems on the fire ground.� But memorizing information is a key mechanism of learning, without which little knowledge is possible. To the extent that the lieutenant and captains� jobs require the acquisition of additional knowledge, conveying and testing that knowledge in written form is perfectly reasonable. None of these features of the exam would have been considered the least bit problematic if blacks had not performed poorly.
The final charge against the exam is the most desperate of all. Janet Helms, a professor of clinical psychology at Boston College and author of such works as A Race Is a Nice Thing to Have: A Guide to Being A White Person or Understanding the White Persons in Your Life speculated to the city�s civil-service board that black firefighters in New Haven may have developed their own unique, black way of fighting fires in response to unequal opportunity on the job. The portrait of firefighting that the test developer used in drawing up the test might have been biased toward the �white� way of firefighting in New Haven, Helms continued, since two-thirds of the firefighters who submitted analyses of their jobs to the test developer were white. Helms had no knowledge of firefighting, had refused to review the promotional exam, and had sought no exposure to the New Haven Fire Department. She provided not one shred of evidence to support any plank of her theory�which makes her superlatively representative of the race industry.
In light of such fantastical speculations, it is worth reviewing New Haven�s efforts to ensure that the test measured the requisite supervisory skills and did not contain any possible hypothetical bias. The test developer interviewed and rode alone with the department�s chiefs, lieutenants, and captains to identify the knowledge and abilities essential for the positions of captain and lieutenant. At every point, the test developer oversampled minority firefighters while building his portrait of the job. The 100 questions on the written exam were pitched below a tenth-grade reading level. Each of the three-man assessment panels for the oral exam was composed of one white, one black, and one Hispanic firefighter. Third-party reviewers confirmed that the oral exam accurately tested the real-world situations confronting supervisors.
Perhaps in implicit recognition that the case for bias in the New Haven exam was laughably weak, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pulled out the usual race-industry trump card in her dissent: historical discrimination. The majority opinion, she said, �leaves out important parts of the story��to wit, that firefighting �is a profession in which the legacy of racial discrimination casts an especially long shadow.� It�s no surprise that Ginsburg never bothered explicating her metaphor, because she provided no evidence, apart from the allegedly biased test itself, of how the �long shadow� affects the New Haven Fire Department today. We are just supposed to assume that because firefighting was inhospitable to blacks four decades ago, it remains so now, and that such inhospitality prevents blacks from succeeding on promotional exams. (Past discrimination against Jews by the Ivy Leagues may also be said to cast �an especially long shadow,� yet it has had no noticeable effect on their performance today.)
The Court�s majority and minority opinions are assiduously silent about the only reason why anyone views the New Haven firefighters� exam through the lens of race at all: the gap in cognitive attainment between blacks and whites. As Stuart Taylor pointed out in his National Journal blog, the average black high school senior possesses the academic skills and knowledge of an average white eighth-grader. For decades, blacks have scored 200 points below whites and Asians on the verbal and math SATs. This skills gap means that it is virtually impossible to devise any job test that measures mastery of a body of knowledge and cognitive expertise that will not have a disparate racial result. To discuss black underperformance on any given task without mentioning the skills deficit is like having a discussion about rain and drought without mentioning cloud formation. As long as black underachievement remains unacknowledged, the old standby�racism�will always rush into the vacuum as an explanation for disparate impact.
None of the many advocates charging bias in the New Haven firefighters� exam has produced any examples of black firefighters� expending anywhere near Ricci�s eight to 13 hours a day of preparation. Presumably, if such cases existed, we would have heard about them by now. Is it possible that if more black firefighters had devoted as much effort to studying as the successful candidates did, they would have done better on the exam?
|
http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0707hm.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mr. Fox, you might as well not say anything.
This is Dave's where many posters see nothing wrong with doing privates, or otherwise violating their contract/terms of visa...yet scream bloody murder should their employer not keep up his end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mises:
Thanks for sharing that article, it's bang on, as the Brits would say. Race has indeed become an industry and those who profit most from it are liberal Whites and the minority elites (notice I didn't lump all ranks within minority groups together). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Article wrote: |
| Today I am urging my colleagues to pass legislation that will allow any candidate for firefighter that possesses a high school diploma (or its educational equivalent) from a New York City high school to become eligible for an additional eight point credit on the open competitive firefighter exam. |
Why should having graduated in New York City specifically entitle you to extra points on an exam meant to test for qualification? If you have to do nonsense like this to "increase diversity" then it seems to me maybe increasing diversity in the fire fighting department is not in the city's best interests. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Article wrote: |
| Today I am urging my colleagues to pass legislation that will allow any candidate for firefighter that possesses a high school diploma (or its educational equivalent) from a New York City high school to become eligible for an additional eight point credit on the open competitive firefighter exam. |
Why should having graduated in New York City specifically entitle you to extra points on an exam meant to test for qualification? If you have to do nonsense like this to "increase diversity" then it seems to me maybe increasing diversity in the fire fighting department is not in the city's best interests. |
You don't think it can be justified that a city favor its own otherwise qualified residents in hiring? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
