"Achievement Gap" - One of my favorite leftist terms

[wickedsolo]

that would probably be why that term doesnt make sense to you then.

if you cant see that as a possibility even, then you disagree with the context before the concept even comes into play.

Because it is a statistical improbability that multiple people have the exact same background, skills, experience, and effort/output.


Everyone is different. That's the point. The idea of trying to correct a so-called "Achievement Gap" suggests that everyone is the same.

[Ortizer]

sure, Do you not? I dont consider that hypothetical, but a common occurrence.

I have a former co-worker that had the same degree as me, from a similar school. worked hard. long hours, always made himself available (late/weekends), just like myself. same company. well liked and respected. same ability (we regularly shared). I got promoted, he didnt. he asked to be, they still didnt. he ended up leaving. he was doing the same work, giving as many hours or even more than me at times and doing all the extra little stuff i saw myself doing, he didnt get the same treatment. when i asked about it after he left, everybody said "i liked him, not sure why they didnt promote him." nobody seemed to have an answer and agreed he was deserving.

I also know from my wife's experience at one company where a guy thats had more experience than her in the field, worked there longer, was highly respected and liked by their peers took over for her after she left and made 10k less than she was when she started. when he told them he knew what she was making, they said my wife was lying and they never paid anybody that much. He also ended up leaving because of it. similar degrees from highly regarded schools, if anything he had more traits for the position than she had (which he applied for before they hired her). She left because it wasnt for her. Id classify that as 2 people with very similar skills (or to his advantage even) and him not getting the same achievement.

Who started later in the second example? Companies will almost always pay less to the person who has been there longer unless something forces them to pay more.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

[BPF2]

agreed. it probably was something little and clearly im so lovable, but even if it was exactly the same, even those little factors, If theres only one job available, youre right that call has to be made one way or another. The factor here is usually education in those terms, and does 2 people with similar education end up at the same level of achievement? I think everybody would agree thats not the case. theres always other factors and "achievement gap" is a real thing, but i dont think that means theres a straight answer to solving it for that reason. its a concept based on idealistic reasons instead of real world practice.

But I don't think it's a problem that actually needs to be solved. If it's a concept based on idealism, then you can never solve it, because you'll never get to ideal. In reality, the gap gets solved by individuals making decisions. If you feel like you are on equal footing in every possible measure with someone, but they get a promotion or are paid more, then you make a decision. Tell the boss you want equal pay or you leave to get it elsewhere. That comes with risk - risk of not finding it elsewhere either, or the other position is not what you thought, or the boss explains bluntly why you are not in fact equals. Or you decide the gap isn't worth the risk and you keep on doing your job.

And back to Wicked's original post - when I hear someone talking about an "achievement gap", I don't think of it in the terms we have just been discussing. I hear it used more often as an excuse for why one person gets ahead and another doesn't - upbringing, education, race, gender, etc. And it's usually discussed in terms of taking from those who have achieved to give to those who haven't.

[JAB1985]

There are so many different factors that could be at play there. Maybe you were more professional, maybe you dressed better, maybe you were more personable with the right person? Maybe it was a coin flip?

Also, someone that is educated, experienced, and a hard worker is going to achieve. Maybe this person didn't achieve the same as you in the same company, but to suggest that they wouldn't achieve elsewhere with the same creds and experience doesn't make sense to me (not saying you're directly saying that, btw).

true. He went to a smaller company in hopes of standing out and getting promoted quicker. last time i talked to him, that wasnt going well and he wished he had just stayed.

Call it luck of the draw or what have you, there have been people who are experienced, hard working and educated that dont make it as far as others from my experience. Im at a place in my company doing well and moved up the ladder but i can look back at college and say i wasnt the top student. one of the guys that was just really sharp, always worked hard, has the same degree. he never made it nearly as far and left the field all together. could he have had the same success in my shoes? likely. did he elsewhere? no. so Id say my experience is a little different than yours. I dont think thats the norm by any means, but I do think it happens.

FTR a company has that right to choose what they value. so when you say its an issue that needs fixing, i dont know if there is a fix to that. what I think its getting lost is that argument tends to be about something based outside of their control and considers that unfair. I understand theres differences in why these choices are made and why they have to be made by a company, im not arguing for it, im only trying to help clarify the difference. I dont see them as the same. the same person might be using them, but one i feel is basically socialism (equality of outcome) and the other is putting a label on what is just a side effect of an imperfect world.

...but gender pay gap...


;)


Maybe your wife negotiated a better deal than he did? That happens to, you know? It happened to me when I first left the government. I didn't ask for more salary up front and I didn't get it...and I learned from that and negotiated better when the time came.

I purposely left out that he was a black guy because i didnt want to get off track and go down that rabbit hole, but maybe thats an important thing to add to this because I think when people are talking about "achievement gap", theyre talking about those parameters other than education that are causing this and not within their control. that may be a big one theyre referencing. I know that was meant to be tongue in cheek but figured id share the rest for clarity. Im not sure the context youre hearing it used. i do see it as different than "equality of outcome", but maybe it is more closely connected to discrimination.

my wife and I have talked about it multiple times and still point to that as a sign of discrimination. she admits quite plainly, he was more experienced, better suited for the job, better at it, and frankly more loyal to them, and well liked around the office, they just refused to pay him. she didnt negotiate at all, she just took what they offered initially. they offered him less and when he tried to negotiate based off his experience, they refused and said they didnt pay anybody that. when he said he knew they did from talking to my wife, they said she lied. theyre entitled to pay him what they want and negotiate how they feel inclined to, but the question is, "what was the difference to them?" to just flat out lie. In his case, he did move on to another company and i believe a higher position. so outside that company, it did equal out.

[JAB1985]

Who started later in the second example? Companies will almost always pay less to the person who has been there longer unless something forces them to pay more.

my wife. he was there for i believe 10 years. you can see above more to it than just trying to get away with paying him less and actively refusing.

But I don't think it's a problem that actually needs to be solved. If it's a concept based on idealism, then you can never solve it, because you'll never get to ideal. In reality, the gap gets solved by individuals making decisions. If you feel like you are on equal footing in every possible measure with someone, but they get a promotion or are paid more, then you make a decision. Tell the boss you want equal pay or you leave to get it elsewhere. That comes with risk - risk of not finding it elsewhere either, or the other position is not what you thought, or the boss explains bluntly why you are not in fact equals. Or you decide the gap isn't worth the risk and you keep on doing your job.

And back to Wicked's original post - when I hear someone talking about an "achievement gap", I don't think of it in the terms we have just been discussing. I hear it used more often as an excuse for why one person gets ahead and another doesn't - upbringing, education, race, gender, etc. And it's usually discussed in terms of taking from those who have achieved to give to those who haven't.

agreed, im not sure you can solve something like that. I didnt see this before my last response, but i think thats what im seeing is the issue. its more about a form of discrimination and people not willing to take risk to make a move. maybe its an entitlement issue. in that sense, i dont agree with it, but i dont know how its being used in these cases. I still think its quite different from equality of outcome though. im not seeing that connection. How is it taking from those that have achieved to point out others havent?

[Terpsfan82]

id agree with Rowe as well, but i think thats a different topic.

id ask what phrase do you call two people with the same skills, working the same hours and work ethic (same effort and skills), yet one being more rewarded than another (most likely financially but could be anything)?

I think this isnt referred to as a "skill/effort gap", because when theres a gap in those its understood why the results would vary. the "achievement gap" is when those things are the same but results still vary. I think thats also a different issue than "equality of outcome", which is when somebody argues that despite different effort/skills we should end up the same. i can see how they get intertwined, but they really are different issues. rather than arguing we should all end up at the same place despite different skills/effort (equality of outcome), the argument is that if the effort and skills are the same, they should end up the same. when they dont thats an "achievement gap". Its idealistic rather than realistic, but thats the point of it, wanting to eliminate the other factors that cause the variation outside of ones own control. I dont think its untrue that two people with similar degrees, and work ethics can have completely different outcomes in that sense.

If I use an analogy, Runner A runs a 4.2 40, runner B runs a 4.2 40. Runner C runs a 4.5 40. "Equality of outcome" is that A and B run a 40, C runs 38 yards, and they all finish at the exact same time. you give an advantage to somebody that didnt have the same skill to get the same result. "Achievement gap" is if they all run 40, A and B should tie, but they claim one the winner over the other. that shouldnt happen, because their ability is the same, but something outside their control decided a different outcome.

Good ssummary.

[RavenIsh]

Every time I hear someone claim that they're not arguing for equality of outcome, but then they say "Achievement Gap" in the same sentence...lmao. The two are at odds with each other.

Achievement, basically, is the output of skills + effort.

So, any time you hear some lefty nutjob talk about "Achievement Gaps", what they're really saying is "you're more successful than I am and I'm envious, but I dont want to put the work in nor do I have the skills to get where you are."

That's what that means.

You just described common core. Lol. ", Give me a grade even though I didn't do any work." In fact, wicked, you worked hard to get what you have. I just sleep until noon everyday, but I want government to give me everything you got and make you pay for it. Lol.

The liberals hate Eagles (and that statement is loaded). They love turkeys; domesticated birds that are bred to be food for others.

[blah3]

You just described common core. Lol. ", Give me a grade even though I didn't do any work." In fact, wicked, you worked hard to get what you have. I just sleep until noon everyday, but I want government to give me everything you got and make you pay for it. Lol.

The liberals hate Eagles (and that statement is loaded). They love turkeys; domesticated birds that are bred to be food for others.

Yeah not a fan of common core, but what you just described is not it.

[RavenIsh]

sure, Do you not? I dont consider that hypothetical, but a common occurrence.

I have a former co-worker that had the same degree as me, from a similar school. worked hard. long hours, always made himself available (late/weekends), just like myself. same company. well liked and respected. same ability (we regularly shared). I got promoted, he didnt. he asked to be, they still didnt. he ended up leaving. he was doing the same work, giving as many hours or even more than me at times and doing all the extra little stuff i saw myself doing, he didnt get the same treatment. when i asked about it after he left, everybody said "i liked him, not sure why they didnt promote him." nobody seemed to have an answer and agreed he was deserving.

I also know from my wife's experience at one company where a guy thats had more experience than her in the field, worked there longer, was highly respected and liked by their peers took over for her after she left and made 10k less than she was when she started. when he told them he knew what she was making, they said my wife was lying and they never paid anybody that much. He also ended up leaving because of it. similar degrees from highly regarded schools, if anything he had more traits for the position than she had (which he applied for before they hired her). She left because it wasnt for her. Id classify that as 2 people with very similar skills (or to his advantage even) and him not getting the same achievement.

All things will never be equal because there's so much more than just degrees and skill sets. Now we all are sports fans or we wouldn't be on this forum. If you were running a team who would you want? Tom Brady or Peyton Manning? Terrell Owens or Jerry Rice? It's like the arguments against Colin Krapernick. Is he a better QB than Blaine Gabbert? Maybe but there are other factors.

Attitude. Chemistry. Belief in company vision. Is a person a cancer or a team player? What an employer is willing to invest in should be left to the discretion of the owner. It should not be forced upon.

[RavenIsh]

I dont know of many situations where two people have the exact same skills and the exact same levels of effort.

But let's say you employ two such persons. There are other factors you will consider and you should, and it should be based on your comfort level and judgment. One of those persons may have an ulterior motive and the other believes in your mission and is committed to helping you.

[wickedsolo]

All things will never be equal because there's so much more than just degrees and skill sets. Now we all are sports fans or we wouldn't be on this forum. If you were running a team who would you want? Tom Brady or Peyton Manning? Terrell Owens or Jerry Rice? It's like the arguments against Colin Krapernick. Is he a better QB than Blaine Gabbert? Maybe but there are other factors.

Attitude. Chemistry. Belief in company vision. Is a person a cancer or a team player? What an employer is willing to invest in should be left to the discretion of the owner. It should not be forced upon.

Equality is a pipe dream. Outside of absolutes, there aren’t many things in nature that are equal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JAB1985]

All things will never be equal because there's so much more than just degrees and skill sets. Now we all are sports fans or we wouldn't be on this forum. If you were running a team who would you want? Tom Brady or Peyton Manning? Terrell Owens or Jerry Rice? It's like the arguments against Colin Krapernick. Is he a better QB than Blaine Gabbert? Maybe but there are other factors.

Attitude. Chemistry. Belief in company vision. Is a person a cancer or a team player? What an employer is willing to invest in should be left to the discretion of the owner. It should not be forced upon.

I dont disagree. I do believe that "gap" exists, but I dont think its anything that the government, or anybody for that matter, can fix. I was just trying to clarify the difference between the terms presented by the OP. When it gets intertwined with other factors, discrimination for one as we later came around to, I think it gets a negative connotation to some. the achievement gap term is very specific that its referring to education typically, so when we start adding other factors, the term loses some validity.

I think the analogy above works from the Teams/company perspective, but look at it from the players perspective as well. If youre a team and you can have tom brady AND peyton manning, do you not take both? theres no salary cap in real life. only one will be the starter and the other will be a backup, but why not offer him the job? there's a gap between their achievement level, but not skill level. so we can talk about micro analyzing them to determine a starter, but generally theyre two of the best of all time, with similar pedigrees. The team would obviously do this if there was no salary cap, like in real life, and maybe that job is better than no job for Manning. maybe achievement gap comes down to job availability per skill set, more so than varying skill sets or outside factors.