Legal Education Commons^™

Testing, Diversity, And Merit: A Reply To Dan Subotnik And Others, Andrea Curcio, Carol Chomsky, Eileen Kaufman

Eileen Kaufman

The false dichotomy between achieving diversity and rewarding merit frequently surfaces in discussions about decisions on university and law school admissions, scholarships, law licenses, jobs, and promotions. “Merit” judgments are often based on the results of standardized tests meant to predict who has the best chance to succeed if given the opportunity to do so. This Article criticizes over-reliance on standardized tests and responds to suggestions that challenging the use of such tests reflects a race-comes-first approach that chooses diversity over merit. Discussing the firefighter exam that led to the Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DiStefano, as well as …

Virginia Bar Exam, July 2014, Section 2

Virginia Bar Exam Archive

No abstract provided.

Virginia Bar Exam, July 2014, Section 1

Virginia Bar Exam Archive

No abstract provided.

Virginia Bar Exam, February 2014, Section 1

Virginia Bar Exam Archive

No abstract provided.

Virginia Bar Exam, February 2014, Section 2

Virginia Bar Exam Archive

No abstract provided.

Race Indeed Above All: A Reply To Professors Andrea Curcio, Carol Chomsky, And Eileen Kaufman, Dan Subotnik

Scholarly Works

This article was written as part of an ongoing dialog about the author’s previous article, Does Testing = Race Discrimination?: Ricci, The Bar Exam, the LSAT, and the Challenge to Learning, which defended the Supreme Court’s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano, as well as defending testing more generally against charges of irrelevance, racial obtuseness, and most seriously, race discrimination.

This article specifically responds to Andrea A. Curcio, Carol L. Chomsky, and Eileen Kaufman’s article, Testing, Diversity, and Merit: A Reply to Dan Subotnik and Others.

Testing, Diversity, And Merit: A Reply To Dan Subotnik And Others, Andrea A. Curcio, Carol L. Chomsky, Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

The false dichotomy between achieving diversity and rewarding merit frequently surfaces in discussions about decisions on university and law school admissions, scholarships, law licenses, jobs, and promotions. “Merit” judgments are often based on the results of standardized tests meant to predict who has the best chance to succeed if given the opportunity to do so. This Article criticizes over-reliance on standardized tests and responds to suggestions that challenging the use of such tests reflects a race-comes-first approach that chooses diversity over merit. Discussing the firefighter exam that led to the Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DiStefano, as well as …