<p>Ignoring cultural and gender difference (one biased standard for all) is just as bad as giving a preference to non qualified applicants(AA). My point all along has been that what some of you call AA (ie.) shaping a class among equals is no such thing, just as you say ignoring certain differences is not biased.</p>
<p>The truly equitable, non biased, non racial answer must lie somewhere in between. There are measurable differences on standardized tests, parental income and education, location and a multitude of other measurements that can’t be ignored. Until the societal biases that produce very different results on what should be standard measurement disappears, we need to identify which members of these groups is as able, and if given equal opportunity, would excel as other top students can.</p>
<p>I will admit current attempts to do so fall short of the mark. There are to many false positives under one scenario and too many false negatives under the other. Proponents of one will call the others strategy biased. I see only one way to reduce the error rate. That involves gathering a lot more personal information about applicants. Then we can apply more careful analysis to truly identify those who only appear less talented due to inherent system bias, disadvantaged childhoods or other measurable roadblocks. Until all aspects of our society at least resemble the make up of the whole there is work to be done. I fear there is no simple answer.</p>