The question of whether or not we should include race in our statistical analysis of things like academic or athletic performance really isn't as complicated as we make it out to be.

Saletan correctly argues that if we include race but we do not include other relevant factors that correlate with race - such as socioeconomic status and access to quality education - then we will overestimate the explanatory value of race. This is a well-known statistical concept called omitted variable bias. The upshot here is that if we are diligent about including as many explanatory factors as possible, the magnitude of the effect of omitted variable bias on our assessment of the significance of race should be minimal and the direction of the effect should be indeterminate.

All of this, of course, is predicated on the assumption that we are actually interested in obtaining correct results. Saletan does a good job of observing that, even if race does have explanatory value in academic or athletic performance, we might not want to acknowledge that fact. After all, even if we are diligent about considering all variables in their proper proportion, there are others who will not be. Any argument that states that race is a factor, but that its relevance is limited by its correlation with other factors, is necessarily quite nuanced. And as we learned from the past eight years, our society has the capacity to treat nuance with great contempt, and our leaders - social, cultural, political and otherwise - have the capacity to disregard any nuance that they find inconvenient.

After submitting the last post it occurred to me that omitting race as a variable in our statistical analysis of education may have at least one very plausible negative consequence.

One of the points of emphasis in my Teach for America training was that each student learns differently; not just better or worse, but differently. The current research breaks down the learning process into various modalities, such as auditory or visual. Each student responds more to some modalities than others. Success in learning is not just a function of a student's intelligence; how well that student's modalities match up to the lessons provided by his or her teacher may be just as significant an effect.

If there is a correlation between race and favored modalities - and I have no information as to whether it is or is not - then knowledge of that correlation may help us to redesign our teaching methodologies in such a way as to give students of all races an equal chance to succeed. Disregarding such a correlation, if in fact it does exist, encourages us to maintain the status quo - which we have every reason to suspect is unfavorable to minorities.

The modalities argument has been made by, among others, Jeremiah Wright. But here's my question about such a posited difference in learning styles: What is it based on? Is it cultural? economic? something else?

This is a well-known statistical concept called omitted variable bias. The upshot here is that if we are diligent about including as many explanatory factors as possible, the magnitude of the effect of omitted variable bias on our assessment of the significance of race should be minimal and the direction of the effect should be indeterminate.

yes. we should classify everyone in the country as to their color, weight, eye color, height, income, politics, education, size of their breasts, shoe size, fashion sense, hair style and breed of dog they own. then and only then can we define the injustices and determine who and who isn't a victim.

the gubmint should send out forms and force you to fill them out.

My intention was only to suggest that learning modalities might plausibly (and relatively non-controversially) represent a case in which racial difference - as opposed to environmental differences, such as socioeconomic status - might have a direct effect on education policy. In practice we do not yet know if race itself is one of the factors in the determination of a given student's preferred learning modalities.

My guess would be that race is one of many factors, since there is no reason to assume that modal tendencies are exactly equal across all races. I don't presume to know how significant of a factor it is relative to cultural, economic, or other factors - and I certainly don't know if its explanatory value is sufficient to justify changes in policy. But I do think it's worth looking into, since no matter what the result turns out to be we will have another useful piece of statistical information to assist us in the policymaking process.

But I do think it's worth looking into, since no matter what the result turns out to be we will have another useful piece of statistical information to assist us in the policymaking process.

i get it! you want a different policy for the different groups you can identify, create, and pander to. the liberal way.

irvingchang -

I have no interest in determining the extent to which anyone is a "victim". I'm interested in policy - what should we teach and how should we teach it? These are serious questions for serious people, and it would be foolish to try to make them in the absence of valuable statistical information.

The alternative to the statistical approach is not a more personal one - state and federal lawmakers can hardly be expected to get to know each and every student within their jurisdiction and customize the educational experience so as to be optimal for each and every one. It just isn't possible for state and federal lawmakers to get to know each and every student for the unique snowflake that he or she is. No, the alternative to the statistical approach is to blindly guess at which policy might be best.

This is exactly why the learning modalities example is so relevant. It's entirely possible that we have been relying on the lecture modality for so long because it is tradition, and it may only have become tradition because it worked comparatively well for the white students who once, lamentably, were the sole focus of the educational system. In the absence of statistics, we can never know whether or not the status quo needs to change, because we can never know if our choice of modalities systematically favors students of some races over others.

Maybe the differences in preferred modalities are solely a result of social, cultural, and economic factors. Maybe they're not. Maybe you don't care. But I do, because I want to know how to make things better.

No, the alternative to the statistical approach is to blindly guess at which policy might be best.

you mean like the old days when the public schools in this country were the envy of the world?

But I do, because I want to know how to make things better.

excuse me if i'm skeptical. it's this kind of liberal mumbo jumbo that has screwed up the public schools.

When our public schools were "the envy of the world" it was partly because the world had so much catching up to do in terms of establishing public schools in the first place; partly because schools had far fewer funding problems than they do now; and partly because our social structure was such that the most disadvantaged students would drop out entirely rather than struggle through the way they do now.

As someone who has taught in a failing public school I can tell you that schools have real problems with real explanations, not simple problems with absurd causes like "mumbo jumbo". Class size and teacher quality and #1 and #1A on the list as far as I am concerned.

In my first year as a teacher I struggled with all of my large classes and I did well with my one small class. A small class can turn a bad teacher into a passable one, a passable teacher into a good one, and a good teacher into a great one.

It's not hard to reduce class size - but it is expensive, which is why we can't be bothered to do it.

But of course our ideal should be to have as many good teachers as possible, so that small class sizes can allow them to be great. The problems are that we are not willing to pay enough to draw as many good teachers as possible and that the current system does not allow for enough carrots and sticks to motivate all teachers to improve.

Fortunately, improving teacher compensation can help resolve the latter problem as well as the former. Our current, dysfunctional tenure system is a result of the fact that it is cheaper to offer teachers excessive job security than to offer them the sort of salary that they could earn by changing professions and selling their services on the free market. If we are willing to increase teacher pay overall then there is little doubt that teachers' unions will be willing to trade back some of their job security in exchange for fair compensation.

it was partly because the world had so much catching up to do in terms of establishing public schools in the first place; partly because schools had far fewer funding problems than they do now.

i don't want to hear about any sticking funding problems. the problem with the wash DC system is not funding. they spent 14k per year per pupil which is much higher than that toney sidwell school the obama girls attend.

atlanta, NYC, philly, chicago and other big districts spend about 10k per year on average.

you can't convince me that it is a funding problem because the funding is there.

it is the management. that means you and excuse making guilt pushers like you.

I agree that we should take a long, hard look at the way that what funding makes it to schools is spent. You'd be amazed at how much money is wasted on things like standardized testing, especially when you add in the cost of the preparation materials that have superseded textbooks as the primary focus of many classrooms. But the fact remains that, whether smaller classes and higher teacher salaries are made possible by spending cuts in other areas, by increased funding or - most realistically - by both, something needs to be done in order to improve our schools. The undeniable fact is that our classes are too big and our teachers are not of sufficient quality. If you really think that much money is being wasted, then by all means, come up with a solution.

As for your assertion that "it is the management" - are school administrators and the like inherently, magically bad at management? Or is there some systematic reason why that might be? If so, what is the systematic reason, and how might we resolve it? I am also curious as to how I, as a software engineer, am a part of that management. Perhaps it's the software engineers who need better pay! I could get on board with that.

But all joking aside, I hope you know what a turd you sound like when you assert without evidence that I am an "excuse making guild pusher", and that people like me are responsible for causing problems that you have not been able to identify by some mechanism that you have yet to explain.

Or is there some systematic reason why that might be? If so, what is the systematic reason, and how might we resolve it...

yes it is systematic. i have to walk the dog and will tell you how liberal policies such as mainstreaming, outcome based cirriculum, the emphasis on self esteem and not academics, the lack of discipline, affirmative action, and low expectations have rendered the public school system into a muddled mess.

ah hell, you get the picture. i met with an assistant principal of a high school in my area the other day. she could not speak english correctly and talked in eboniclike grunting tones. i'd fire her right now for being ignorant if i had the power.

You'd be amazed at how much money is wasted on things like standardized testing, especially when you add in the cost of the preparation materials that have superseded textbooks as the primary focus of many classrooms.

i went to grammar school in the 50's and we had standardized tests. a couple of times a year as i remember. what is the big deal? can't you handle them? what is your major malfunction?

give the fucking tests and quit your goddmaned whining for christsakes.

If you really think that much money is being wasted, then by all means, come up with a solution.

OK. this is what you do. the darlings get to school (on time) and the role is taken. if i were the teacher i would inspect the little darlings for proper hygiene and attire. then i would sit the darlings down and lead them in a prayer so they can give thanks to god for giving them the opportunity to get an education.

then it's down to work. a full morning of mathamatics, english, science. any little miscreant causing trouble and keeping others from leaning is banished immediately with corporal punishment applied.

then it's time to do about 25 minutes of physical training for the public health. running, jumping jacks, tai chi, and some basketball to improve grace. shower up and it's off to lunch.

no cafeteria food. you must bring your own lunch. if one cannot be provided by the parent, the parent is arrested. all we will give you is an 8 oz carton of milk for the vitamin D.

back to work with an afternoon of geography, history, maybe some music or art to get those who are in touch with their artistic side to prove it.

then the little darlings get on the bus and go home to their worthless parents.