評論
打印
"We knew that our minority students, a lot of them, were doing well," says Richard Lempert, one of the authors of the Michigan study.
“我知道的我們那些少數族裔學生，他們大部分都干得很不錯，”密歇根該項計劃負責人之一的理查德.蘭柏說
"I think our expectation was that we would find a half or twothirdsfull glass,
“我們原來預計，調査人數的一半或者三分之二都會不如白人學生做得好，
that they had not done as well as the white students but nonetheless a lot were quite successful.
盡管他們很多人應該還是成功的。
But we were completely surprised. We found out that they were doing every bit as well.
然而調査的結果讓我們大吃一驚。我們發現他們每一件事情都做得像白人學生一樣好，
There was no place where we saw any serious discrepancy."
沒發現他們之間存在什么明顯的差異。”
What Lempert is saying is that by the only measure that a law school really ought to care about
蘭柏所說的也是法學院必須正視的唯一選拔法則
how well its graduate students in the real world minority students aren't less qualified.
那就是從這里畢業的學生在現實世界中的表現如何一少數族裔學生并非不夠資格。
They're just as successful as white students.
他們和白人學生一樣能夠取得成功
And why? Because even though the academic credentials of minority students at Michigan aren't as good as those white students,
為什么？因為即便密歇根大學這些少數族裔學生在學習資歷上不如白人學生優秀，
the quality of students at the law school is high enough that they're still above the threshold.
但是法學院培養的學生質量卻足夠高，他們的智商依舊超過了進入大學所要求的標準。
They are smart enough.
他們足夠聰明。
Knowledge of a law student's test scores is of little help if you are faced with a classroom of clever law students.
如果整個房間的法學院學生都足夠聰明，那么知道他們的測試結果就亳無必要。
Let's take the threshold idea one step further.
讓我們進一步展開這種標準劃分的觀點。
If intelligence only matters up to a point, then pass that point, other things
如果說智商只和某一方面相關，那么我們先把它擱置一旁，進入到其他方面
things that have nothing to do with intelligence must start to matter more.
一些和智商毫不相關的方曲——很多地方都值得關注。
It's like basketball again: once you're tall enough, then we start to care about speed and court sense and shooting touch.
就如前面說到的籃球運動一樣：如果你夠高，那么我們開始關注你的速度、球場上的感覺和靈敏度、控球技術以及投籃技巧。
So, what might some of those other things be?
那么，所謂的“其他方面”指的又是什么？
Well, suppose that instead of measuring your IQ, I gave you a totally different kind of test.
好吧，如果要知道你的智商，我會讓你看看另外一種測試。
Write down as many different uses that you can think of for the following objects: a brick, a blanket.
看到以下的物體，請寫下你能想到的它們的不同用途：
This is what's called a "divergence test"
這種方法叫做發散測試，
(as opposed to a test like the Raven's, which asks you to sort through a list of possibilities and converge on the right answer).
和瑞文測驗相反，它讓你選出和正確答案相類似的所有可能性答案。
It requires you to use your imagination and take your mind in its many directions as possible.
它需要你充分發揮自己的想象力，盡可能讓的思維發散。
With a divergence test like this, there obviously isn't a single right answer.
很顯然，這樣的發散測試沒有唯一正確的答案。
