If someone wishes to have a serious conversation about the relation between race/ethnicity and academic achievement, we could certainly have it. It would be an extraordinary achievement here, however, because the basic and, so far as I can tell, only style is flaming different points of view.
I fully realize many points that could be made in the discussion that are difficult, to put it mildly:
1.- The statistical issues are difficult. I am somewhat familiar with them since my job requires me to do a bit of epidemiology. I do not claim expertise, yet I do not see any evidence here that any poster can properly address them.
2.- The definitional issues are hellish, too.
3.- You are absolutely correct that untangling class from ethnicity is daunting--part of the statistical and definitional issue, in my view, though you seem to think that the better prism is class, a notion with which I disagree because it injects improper value judgments into the discussion.
I'm not sure that it is possible to arrive at anything approaching a decent answer even if an otherwise qualified person were to devote years of study to the issue.
Given the difficulties, I suspect it is best to leave the subject alone. There is far too much room for interpretation. Moreover, very few of us--not me, for sure--are qualified to discuss the issue in any intelligent fashion.
Nonetheless, I don't agree with your a priori notion that discussion will probably lead to flame wars. As you well know, posters here will not allow others to get away with sloppy thinking and facile comments. Valid criticism is often self-indulgently characterized as flaming. Failure to substantively respond to valid criticism by decrying its tone can properly be interpreted as avoiding the issue. From a human standpoint, it is also quite annoying. Discussions that could otherwise be fruitful do not take place. |
