John Smith, a white, scores 327 on a vocational-aptitude test. Fred Jones, a black, gets only 283. But if the two applicants are sent to a prospective employer, their test results are said to rank identically at the 70th percentile. A computer error? No. The raw score Jones earned was compared only with the marks obtained by fellow blacks. Smith’s number went into a blend of scores made by whites and “others.” If a Hispanic takes the same test, his raw score is converted on a third curve reserved for Hispanics only.
Sound fair? It is — and it isn’t. “Within-group scoring,” sometimes known as race norming, has been used for a decade by the U.S. Labor Department as a form of affirmative action. This spring it became part of a partisan brawl as Republicans and Democrats squared off over the latest update of civil rights legislation. Last week House Democrats agreed to an explicit ban on race norming as part of an effort to salvage their version of the civil rights bill. But the congressional din threatens to drown out an important debate over the value of testing and the amount of racial redress white America will tolerate.
The Labor Department’s program started, ironically enough, under the Reagan Administration. In 1981 Labor began to promote use of an expanded version of its General Aptitude Test Battery as a basis for referring job applicants to private employers. But civil rights activists were leery. Minorities score lower in general on the tests than whites; exams have served in the past as a ruse to filter out black or brown applicants. So race norming was added as a way to make the results “color-blind.” Eventually, 35 states adopted the Labor Department program in some measure. Until recently, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission encouraged firms in some cases to shade scores for the benefit of minorities. Variations of norming have been used in other programs as well.
Five years ago, the Reagan Justice Department suddenly denounced the GATB practice, saying it was reverse discrimination and thus illegal under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Such practices do seem to contradict both the letter and the spirit of Title VII, the basic equal-employment law, which was designed to foster color blindness. Race norming also runs head-on into traditional American notions of advancement based on individual achievement.
The situation grew even murkier when the National Research Council reviewed the battery of general-aptitude tests in the wake of the Justice assault. It found the 12-part exam to be bias-free. But the council also found that low GATB scores tend to be less reliable predictors of job success or failure than high marks, a fact that works against blacks and Hispanics. The reviewers recommended some residual race norming while GATB is refined, a process expected to begin soon.
The Solomonic conclusion satisfied no one. Race norming is one of the many dubious palliatives employed because black Americans still suffer the damage inflicted by centuries of racism. Yet blatant group preferences, such as manipulating test scores, impose their own costs. They fuel a backlash against other reforms, create doubts about individual achievements and can subtly discourage minorities from striving for their full potential. In the high-tech age, tests are a fact of life. Rather than fudge outcomes, society must now face the challenge of equipping everyone to pass them.
More Must-Reads from TIME
- L.A. Fires Show Reality of 1.5°C of Warming
- Home Losses From L.A. Fires Hasten ‘An Uninsurable Future’
- The Women Refusing to Participate in Trump’s Economy
- Bad Bunny On Heartbreak and New Album
- How to Dress Warmly for Cold Weather
- We’re Lucky to Have Been Alive in the Age of David Lynch
- The Motivational Trick That Makes You Exercise Harder
- Column: No One Won The War in Gaza
Contact us at letters@time.com