Equality vs Equity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Equity should mean giving everyone the support they need. The problem that cartoon shows is that it actually gives some absolutely nothing. They aren’t allowed equal opportunity to advance beyond where they are.

Because the support given is relative to the goal. It's okay if not everybody "gets something" if they don't need it to try to achieve the goal. If the goal is to see over the fence to watch the baseball game, of course the tall kid on the left doesn't get anything to assist him, because he doesn't need it. He already has everything he needs with his two long legs. When you go to the movies, some people sit in a chair and listen with their ears, some people sit in a chair and listen to audio description because they are visually impaired, and some people sit in their wheelchair in a designated space to watch the movie.

Let's use an educational example. When students attend college, some students need assistance to be successful their first year. Universities offer tutoring, counseling, and career counseling to help students when they need academic and social support. When I taught years ago, there was also a specific program designated to support migrant students who had not had consistent schooling. It provided academic and social support from people who were familiar with the needs of that specific population. That has since been merged with a multicultural assistance program. There are also programs that provide supports to veterans and students with disabilities. There are supports for everyone, and supports for some that need them. It takes nothing from one group to offer assistance to the other.

Except that this cartoon always, always is used in the wrong circumstances.
Should children behind in reading (or math or handwriting, etc.) have extra help? Yes, absolutely. But should children already performing ahead of expectations be left to their own devices? No. They also need help to continue on their path, to the best of their abilities.
And that’s why I dislike this cartoon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Except this isn’t how equity plays out in real life. The person on the left would be standing in a hole so he couldn’t see just like the others. When we can’t figure out how to bring others up, we hold people back to close the gap, particularly in public education.

[Anonymous]

Except that this cartoon always, always is used in the wrong circumstances.
Should children behind in reading (or math or handwriting, etc.) have extra help? Yes, absolutely. But should children already performing ahead of expectations be left to their own devices? No. They also need help to continue on their path, to the best of their abilities.
And that’s why I dislike this cartoon.

At my school at least, our CLTs include segments where we address both remediation and enrichment. Our differentiation is required to address learners below, on, and above target. We have a specialized enrichment program and kids stay after school for several hours to participate (while other kids receive remediation). I'm sorry that wasn't your experience, because it is happening in plenty of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except this isn’t how equity plays out in real life. The person on the left would be standing in a hole so he couldn’t see just like the others. When we can’t figure out how to bring others up, we hold people back to close the gap, particularly in public education.

Just stop. You keep trying to push this false narrative. No, the person on the left does not and is not really in a hole. This is just your paranoid narrative of “Those people are taking something from me so they can get a decent life.”

Yeah, no.

[Anonymous]

Virtually no one argues for equal outcomes— just a bogeyman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity is SJW buzzwords. You should support equality like MLK truly intended

Stop co-opting and corrupting MLK. You don’t know sh** about him except for a few lines from a few speeches.

MLK was denied a gun carry permit in Alabama by a judge who wanted him to be unarmed and easy prey. King loved guns. So did the Deacons who protected him. You clearly don’t know sh** about him either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Virtually no one argues for equal outcomes— just a bogeyman.

No, I know plenty of people who are advocating for just that. Equal outcomes for everyone. It’s a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except this isn’t how equity plays out in real life. The person on the left would be standing in a hole so he couldn’t see just like the others. When we can’t figure out how to bring others up, we hold people back to close the gap, particularly in public education.

Just stop. You keep trying to push this false narrative. No, the person on the left does not and is not really in a hole. This is just your paranoid narrative of “Those people are taking something from me so they can get a decent life.”

Yeah, no.

When a wealthy black person with strong family ties and community support is given a specific material advantage over a poor white person from a broken home and without any community support then how else would you describe it? Why is skin color more worthy of “equity” than economic class, education level or family circumstances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Virtually no one argues for equal outcomes— just a bogeyman.

Montgomery County passed a law to do just that. They've built their entire governance framework around it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equality means everyone has the same opportunity but outcomes are different.

Equity means outcomes are the same. It will never be, and it sets everyone up for failure .

No. It doesn’t mean that every individual has equal outcomes. It means achieving more aggregate equal outcomes, I.e. women get paid the same as men, blacks have equal levels of home ownership, there is less income inequality across races, etc.

People who say it means equal outcomes for everyone have a narrow understanding of the concept. But they are tend to be the type of people who are frequently wrong but rarely in doubt.

I didn't say every individual, but I see that what I wrote was unclear. There will never be aggregate equal outcomes, either. That would assume systems are the sole factor driving disparate outcomes, and it's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Who decides who gets a stool or ramp and how tall it is? What are they basing this decision on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except this isn’t how equity plays out in real life. The person on the left would be standing in a hole so he couldn’t see just like the others. When we can’t figure out how to bring others up, we hold people back to close the gap, particularly in public education.

Just stop. You keep trying to push this false narrative. No, the person on the left does not and is not really in a hole. This is just your paranoid narrative of “Those people are taking something from me so they can get a decent life.”

Yeah, no.

When a wealthy black person with strong family ties and community support is given a specific material advantage over a poor white person from a broken home and without any community support then how else would you describe it? Why is skin color more worthy of “equity” than economic class, education level or family circumstances?

Does the poor white person get frightened that they might be murdered when they’re pulled over on the side of the road by the police? Yeah, I didn’t think so. That wealthy black person does. Doesn’t matter how much money or community support they have. They’re still followed in the store, still live in fear for being brutalized by the police, and still looked at as being lesser than by many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except this isn’t how equity plays out in real life. The person on the left would be standing in a hole so he couldn’t see just like the others. When we can’t figure out how to bring others up, we hold people back to close the gap, particularly in public education.

Just stop. You keep trying to push this false narrative. No, the person on the left does not and is not really in a hole. This is just your paranoid narrative of “Those people are taking something from me so they can get a decent life.”

Yeah, no.

When a wealthy black person with strong family ties and community support is given a specific material advantage over a poor white person from a broken home and without any community support then how else would you describe it? Why is skin color more worthy of “equity” than economic class, education level or family circumstances?

Does the poor white person get frightened that they might be murdered when they’re pulled over on the side of the road by the police? Yeah, I didn’t think so. That wealthy black person does. Doesn’t matter how much money or community support they have. They’re still followed in the store, still live in fear for being brutalized by the police, and still looked at as being lesser than by many.

This is all political theater because the cops run the plate first and will know the black one is not a criminal but the one white might ht be because poverty has rap sheets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except this isn’t how equity plays out in real life. The person on the left would be standing in a hole so he couldn’t see just like the others. When we can’t figure out how to bring others up, we hold people back to close the gap, particularly in public education.

Just stop. You keep trying to push this false narrative. No, the person on the left does not and is not really in a hole. This is just your paranoid narrative of “Those people are taking something from me so they can get a decent life.”

Yeah, no.

When a wealthy black person with strong family ties and community support is given a specific material advantage over a poor white person from a broken home and without any community support then how else would you describe it? Why is skin color more worthy of “equity” than economic class, education level or family circumstances?

Does the poor white person get frightened that they might be murdered when they’re pulled over on the side of the road by the police? Yeah, I didn’t think so. That wealthy black person does. Doesn’t matter how much money or community support they have. They’re still followed in the store, still live in fear for being brutalized by the police, and still looked at as being lesser than by many.

This is all political theater because the cops run the plate first and will know the black one is not a criminal but the one white might ht be because poverty has rap sheets

Sure. Whatever you need to tell yourself. The fear that every Black person in this country has when pulled over is just all in their heads. If they just keep their hands on the steering wheel and follow the police officer’s directions, nothing bad will happen. Right?

[Anonymous]

Either is fine with me but the way I’d like it implemented is that women have as many bathrooms as needed at concert and stadiums.

I don’t know if it as many stalls as men have stalls and urinals (equality) or women need more (equity) to have smaller lines.

We know there are not more women at football games but the lines are longer for the bathroom.