DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**ElenaEvgeevna** · 07-02-2009, 06:28 PM

Over the past 45 years it has been held that results of tests which displayed poor showings by specific racial groups were suspect in regards to the possibility of discriminatory content in the questions / tests.

As NH has pointed out:

... the only things not known between races is usually cultural, not academic ... The tricky question becomes: Were such possibly discriminatory tests designed with an intent to keep out those who were not wanted? Or: Were the tests in question inherently unfair due to bias which was so instilled that the creators of the tests inadvertently structured them in a way that led to discriminatory results?

Anyone with any knowledge of US history knows that such practices, with the goal to hold tight to the status quo, existed in the past. The intent of the CT law which ahs been knocked down by SCOTUS was to assure that tests were fairly applied.

It seems that the majority of SCOTUS now believes that the USA has sufficiently cleansed itself of any such bias and therefore the playing field should be deemed fair unless, perhaps, a plaintiff can show & prove that a specific test is discriminatory and in violation of the '64 CRA.

07-02-2009, 06:28 PM	#9
ElenaEvgeevna Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 575 Senior Member	Over the past 45 years it has been held that results of tests which displayed poor showings by specific racial groups were suspect in regards to the possibility of discriminatory content in the questions / tests. As NH has pointed out: ... the only things not known between races is usually cultural, not academic ... The tricky question becomes: Were such possibly discriminatory tests designed with an intent to keep out those who were not wanted? Or: Were the tests in question inherently unfair due to bias which was so instilled that the creators of the tests inadvertently structured them in a way that led to discriminatory results? Anyone with any knowledge of US history knows that such practices, with the goal to hold tight to the status quo, existed in the past. The intent of the CT law which ahs been knocked down by SCOTUS was to assure that tests were fairly applied. It seems that the majority of SCOTUS now believes that the USA has sufficiently cleansed itself of any such bias and therefore the playing field should be deemed fair unless, perhaps, a plaintiff can show & prove that a specific test is discriminatory and in violation of the '64 CRA.
	Quote