“Diversity” And Testing: A Double Standard?

In my last post I pointed out that “diversity” is often defended by reference to values or goals that have nothing to do with diversity as traditionally understood, and in fact that have been specifically barred by previous Supreme Court opinions.

Now let me propose a hypocrisy test, one that, appropriately enough, has to do with testing. Some of the most ardent defenders of “diversity” today have been among the most vociferous critics of testing — admissions, aptitude, and even achievement tests, but especially of testing in the employment arena. They have insisted, for example, that any test that has a “disparate impact” on minorities must be abandoned unless it can meet very strict validation standards, i.e., unless it can be proven that its measurements are accurate and that scoring high on the test correlates very closely with success on the job. Since that sort of proof is hard to come by, many employers have simply abandoned employment tests that they had used in the past.

What if all those institutions who claim near magical properties for “diversity,” and who justify racial discrimination because it is necessary to achieve sufficient levels of it, had to meet the same burden of proof that test critics have insisted upon? What if, in short, they had to prove that “diversity” actually produces the benefits they claim for it? The University of Michigan attempted to provide some evidence for its claims, but that evidence fell far short of the standard test critics demand of employers.