Social-justice law firms sue U.Cal system to end testing requirement for applicants

Some policies or actions taken by supposedly sane adults- are easily seen as certain to produce disastrous results.  Which raises the question, if the disaster is easily foreseeable, what would make the supposedly-sane people who FORCED the policy on the rest of us DO such a thing?

Keep this question in mind as you read what follows (from the LA Times four days ago):

Universities were intended to be institutions of higher learning, not remedial schools.  Accordingly, most universities require that applicants demonstrate some minimum proficiency to be admitted.  Two of the ways applicants can demonstrate this proficiency are scores on the ACT or SAT test.

Last Tuesday a carefully-unnamed organization filed two lawsuits against the University of California system, claiming it's violating state civil rights laws by requiring that applicants take either the SAT or ACT.

The lawsuits claim this is a violation of civil rights because they claim both tests discriminate against "disabled, low-income, multilingual and underrepresented minority students."

Note that the first group mentioned was "disabled," which would generate the most agreement among readers.  

The lawsuits claim the tests "discriminate" against the plaintiff class because...wait for it...people who don't study in high school don't do very well on either test.

Of course the lawsuits don't put it that way.  Instead they note that the average scores for certain groups are always lower than for people who study and take education seriously.

Of course the lawsuits don't say that either.  That just happens to be the truth. 


In a letter to U.C. officials in October, the lawyers who filed these two lawsuits threatened litigation if UC did not immediately end the testing requirement.  The suits were filed after the U.Cal system didn't immediately roll over.

Now, you almost certainly don't live in California, so why is this story relevant to you?  Because the UC system is so huge and so influential that if they decide to junk the entrance exams, every other public university in the country will quickly fall in line, ending any requirement for the ACT or SAT.

"Delightful," I hear moonbats saying.  "It's obvious that we need to lower uhhh, wait:  update admission standards at all universities so that all groups are admitted in equal percentages.  I mean, why should we force college students to be able to do abstract, unnecessary things like multiply and divide when everyone uses calculators?"

"Then after we win on this we'll tackle the next goal:  ensuring that all universities graduate exactly the same percentage of all groups admitted.  After all, it's only fair.  Then after that we'll demand that the racial makeup of congress be the same as that of each district."

Of course execs at the ACT and the College Board (which sells the SAT test) quickly disputed the claims of the plaintiffs that their tests are discriminatory, saying differences in test scores "reflected social inequities in access to quality education."  They argued that their tests predict college performance very well, and provide a uniform yardstick that allows colleges to compare applicants, since it's well known that some high school grads with a 4.0-point grade average can't even do basic math.

Amusingly, the execs weren't smart enough to realize that by claiming the gap in test scores wasn't their fault, but due to "social inequities," they were putting themselves out of a job--because social-justice warriors will happily cite either reason to ban the tests.

So let's review:  It's absolutely certain that the liberal moonbats who run the U.C. system will roll over, junking the tests.  Some U.C. execs were already pushing for this, and the rest will quickly get on board.  At that point the system will be deluged with people who can't do basic math but demand admission.  The administrators won't complain since that boosts enrollment, thus salaries.

And as for students who studied hard in high school and were looking for real "higher education"?  That's not the administrators' concern, citizen.  They see their jobs as ensuring equal outcomes, regardless of effort.  If education suffers, it's not their problem.