The Jurisprudence Of Race And Meritocracy

The Jurisprudence of Race and Meritocracy

Standardized Testing and "Race-Neutral" Racism in the Workplace

In this article, the authors Craig Haney and Aida Hurtado reviewed evidence of racial disparities in income and employment which persisted despite legal activity directed towards reducing or eliminating them. They theorize that "The unique jurisprudential role played by the concept of merit has undermined legal attempts to address the structural causes of racial discrimination..." (p.74) and that practices such as standardized employment tests are inimical to the promotion of diversity in the workplace.

To advocate their theory, the authors first argue against the business practice of standardized tests. They found that in most cases, when confronted by evidence in group disparity, courts were much more willing to presume lack of merit, rather than the presence of discrimination. For example, in the case Davis v. Washington, the court believed there was no evidence to show that the standardized employment test was discriminatory against qualified blacks. "However, what was at issue in this case was precisely whether the employment test could determine who was 'qualified'..." (p.85).

The authors then criticized how concepts such as merit and qualification are defined, measured and valued, as well as how they are applied. It is the assumption that there exists uniform and the belief that such concepts can be measured by some universal tool that enforces discrimination. Typically, it is the dominant culture's skills that are recognized and incorporated into the standardized employment tests. "In this way the very notion of 'qualification' is culture bound" (p.91), making characteristics out side the dominant culture norms appear inferior or less qualified. This prevents minorities with counter-normative characteristics from "fitting in", which often leads to group disadvantages in the workplace.

There are alternative theories such as "genes determine intellectual differences among races"(p.81, "Inflammatory Questions", 1991). Advocates of this theory which include psychologists, sociologist and others, believe that genes are the cause of racial