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 .

You are wrong. It is not about the outcome, it is about the opportunity. Equity means you give people the same opportunity even if it means giving people different things. It is up to them to turn that into an outcome.

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.

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 .

You are wrong. It is not about the outcome, it is about the opportunity. Equity means you give people the same opportunity even if it means giving people different things. It is up to them to turn that into an outcome.

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 .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread proves exactly how Youngkin was able to win. Scare a bunch of gullible women with fake scenarios and you'll have em beleiveing anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Even worse, by removing the box for the tall person, the cartoon is actually about taking away opportunities for kids performing ahead of expectations. Basically schools must cancel all AP classes and only focus on remedial assistance.

NP. Yes this is exactly what happens. These are kids! They shouldn't be punished for being on grade level or above grade level. They basically just get stuck on their laptops while the teacher works with below level kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Even worse, by removing the box for the tall person, the cartoon is actually about taking away opportunities for kids performing ahead of expectations. Basically schools must cancel all AP classes and only focus on remedial assistance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Our society is likely screwed. Victimhood is prevailing.

Even worse, by removing the box for the tall person, the cartoon is actually about taking away opportunities for kids performing ahead of expectations. Basically schools must cancel all AP classes and only focus on remedial assistance.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Except the outcomes that you are citing are based almost entirely on people's choices. The differential in wages between men and women is almost entirely based on choice of profession, time taken out from the workforce to raise children, willingness to risk physical injury or death on the job, etc. Individual women working the same job as a man, with these factors the same make nearly the same. So your outcome means that as a society, we have to artificially boost the wages of certain professions, mandate state-funded childcare, etc. I don't think these policies (which have other negative consequences) are worth the "equity" that you desire.

Our society will address many inequalities with better K-12 education and more aggressive child welfare policies, not by artificially boosting people's income after they are miseducated.

How do you explain women and men in the same job making different wages?

Not that poster, but men's and women's salaries are relatively equal until women reach the age of carrying the family caregiving burden. Usually they take more time off, or have fewer personal hours to devote to work, because of kids. But many are also taking care of sick parents, etc. Until the cultural caregiving practices change, women will make less than men in aggregate.

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