upworthy

racial bias

Education

In the early 80s, there was one SAT question that was literally impossible to answer

Everyone got it wrong and it wasn't their fault.

Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash

Teenager is baffled.

As if the SAT didn't already have a less-than-stellar reputation in terms of racial bias and the possible inability to truly measure a student's cognitive abilities, now a story about an expensive blunder is once again making the rounds on social media. Back in 1982, one math question on the test was completely impossible to answer on the multiple-choice Scantron. How was that possible? Because the correct answer hadn't even been listed.

Pencil, SAT test, Scantron, testing, SATsClassic SAT test. Photo by Nguyen Dang Hoang Nhu on Unsplash

Here was the question: Picture two circles, a large one marked B and a smaller one next to it with an arrow, marked A. "In the figure above, the radius of Circle A is 1/3 the radius of Circle B. Starting from the position shown in the figure, Circle A rolls around Circle B. At the end of how many revolutions of Circle A will the center of the circle first reach its starting point?" Is it A, 3/2; B, three; C, six; D, 9/2; or E, nine?

On the Veritasium YouTube page, they explain that if you were to look at the problem logically, you'd conclude the answer was B, three. Because the circumference of a circle is 2Ï€r, and the radius of Circle B is three times that of Circle A, "logically it should take three full rotations of Circle A to roll around." However, that answer is wrong.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

In Jack Murtagh's piece "The SAT Problem that Everyone Got Wrong" for Scientific American, he conveys it all came down to the Coin Rotation Paradox (take note of this if you want to sound super intelligent on your next date or job interview).

You can try this yourself. Murtagh writes, "Here's how the paradox works: Place two quarters flat on a table so that they are touching. Holding one coin stationary on the table, roll the other quarter around it, keeping edge contact between the two without slipping. When the moving quarter returns to its starting location, how many full rotations has it made?"

Again, most test takers assumed that the answer was three. But "in fact, Circle A makes four rotations on its trip—again, exactly one more rotation than intuition expects. The paradox was so far from the test writers’ awareness that four wasn’t offered as an option among the possible answers, so even the most astute students were forced to submit a wrong response."

Why in fact was this the case? On the Scientific American YouTube page, it's explained again: "If you replace the larger circle with a straight line of the same length, then the smaller circle would indeed make three rotations. Somehow the circular path creates an extra rotation. And to see why, just imagine rotating a circle around a single point. There are two sources of rotation here. One from rolling along a path—and the longer the path is, the more rotations. And another from revolving around an object, which creates one extra rotation, no matter its size."

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Okay, one more try. Here, it's relayed in terms of actual astrophysics: "This general principle extends far beyond a mathematical fun fact. In fact, it's essential in astronomy for accurate timekeeping. When we count 365 days going by in a year—365.24, to be precise—we say we're just counting how many rotations the Earth makes in one orbit around the Sun. But it's not that simple. All this counting is done from the perspective of you on Earth. To an external observer, they'll see the Earth do one extra rotation to account for its circular path around the Sun. So while we count 365.24 days in a year, they count 366.24 days in a year."

What might be equally interesting is that out of 300,000 SAT test-takers who got that question at the time, only three wrote in to the College Board to challenge the answer. Ultimately, they had to fix the test, which cost them over $100,000. (In 1982, that's at least ten Happy Meals.)

The comment section on YouTube was buzzing.

gif, wrong, reaction, reaction gif, math problemYoure Wrong John C Mcginley GIFGiphy

This person suggests following your gut, even if that does mean challenging a professor or other authority figure: "In college, I took a poetry class and once had an answer marked wrong on a test. Confident in my response, I reached out to the poet themselves, who affirmed I was right and even communicated this to my professor. Despite not being a fan of poetry, that moment made me quite proud!"

Another person commented on the reasoning behind the paradox itself: "That part about the circle rotating around the triangle was mind-blowing. You instantly understand why it's not the same if the circle rolls on a flat line or rolls on a curved line."

And for this person, it brought peace of mind: "This was the one SAT I took, and I remember the question that didn't have a correct answer, and it wasn't until today that I understood the right answer. I can die happy now."

From Your Site Articles
standardized tests
More

This viral Facebook post explains the harsh realities of being a black man in America.

This Facebook post is worth a read.

When a UPS package arrived at Sean Carter's doorstep that wasn't his, he declined to deliver it to the correct house. Instead, he called the shipping company to request that they come and pick it up.    

Why would a Harvard-educated lawyer decline to do something so seemingly simple and harmless? Because, according to Carter, for American black men, it’s not.

In a heartfelt, painfully real Facebook post, Carter explained how racism puts black American men and boys in impossibly difficult, and often unsafe, situations.  

Sean wrote:

"'But Sean, why wouldn’t you be a decent person and just take the package to your neighbor? Or better yet, you have teenage sons. Send one of them. That’s the perk of having teenagers — free menial labor.' The answer is because we’re black. And it’s extremely unsafe to send our boys to the home of any family that we don’t know in this predominantly white neighborhood."

This package has been sitting outside my house for days now. Why? Because we are black. And yes, I’ll explain.UPS...

Posted by Sean Carter on Saturday, April 28, 2018

A father to teenage boys, Carter brought up how a pervasive racism is in society, to the point where he felt uncomfortable asking his sons to deliver the package or pushing himself to do it.

Even though Carter is highly educated, lives in a gated community, and by most standards is a successful, contributing member of his community, he is still seen as a threat because of his blackness.

Carter goes on to cite the countless experiences of other black men and boys who have been viewed as a threat and subsequently criminalized in public spaces as reasoning for his choice. He specifically talks about Brennan Walker, a 14-year-old black teen who decided to walk to school after missing his bus and got lost. In need of directions, Walker knocked on a neighbor's door and was met with gunfire instead help and kindness.  

"THAT is why this f****** package will be sitting on my porch until UPS retrieves it," Carter writes. "Because I can’t trust that my white neighbors won’t see me, a Harvard-educated lawyer (or my 14 yo honor student son) as a roaming homicidal maniac."

Carter's post about "post-racial" America resonated with thousands of Facebook users, and the post went viral.

Social media users from all over the country chimed in to express their solidarity with Carter, share their own experiences, and express frustration over how black people are being treated.

Screenshot from Facebook.

Screenshot from Facebook.

Screenshot from Facebook.

Carter’s post was liked and shared so many times, he appeared on CNN to further discuss his post.

"There’s a reason that you have gates, and it’s not to keep the rich people out," Carter said. "It’s to keep out that 'undesirable element,' whatever that might be. Right now I have a suit on, I don’t look like the undesirable element. But in a hoodie or in weekend attire, I would look like the person you’d call to worry about your neighborhood. I wasn’t going to subject myself or my 14-year-old sons to that."    

Carter's analysis is right. A 2014 study found that black boys as young as 10 years old "were more likely to be seen as older and more responsible for their actions" than their white peers. It's a reality that black men and boys have lived with for decades, and it's a reality that needs to change.  

Carter’s explanation online that black men shouldn’t have to live like this is totally on point, but we should also ensure that we don’t only support Ivy League educated people of color.

Black Americans, regardless of socioeconomic background, educational pedigree, or professional status, should be able to move freely without the fear of persecution.

To ensure that black Americans feel safe in their neighborhoods, jobs, and schools, it will require non-black people to reevaluate their biases and subconscious stereotypes. When people acknowledge their inherent biases and work to see black people as humans as opposed to threats, we create a fairer, safer nation for all people.

Our country has proven time and time again that it’s capable of this change. Let's make it happen.  

From Your Site Articles
More

An unjust arrest at Starbucks. A national conversation. Now? A cash reward of $1.

In April, two black men were arrested and led out of a Philadelphia Starbucks for absolutely no reason.  

On April 12, Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson arrived at the coffee shop a few minutes before a business meeting. Nelson asked to use the bathroom but was denied because he hadn't bought anything. He returned to the table where he and Robinson were waiting for their associate. They were approached, The Washington Post reports, by the white manager only moments later. Her message: Buy something.

By now you probably know what happened next: Unsatisfied with whatever answer she was given, the manager called 911 and asked for help. Two men, she told the dispatcher, were refusing to buy something or leave. Nelson and Robinson were handcuffed and escorted out of the cafe by policemen. Then, they were taken to jail.  

A recording of the arrest instantly went viral, with the public responding in outrage to both the manager's actions (how many of us have sat in Starbucks for hours without ordering so much as a water?) and the police's response.    

The pair recollected the traumatic incident on ABC news:

Nelson and Robinson have now reached a settlement with the city. It's a study in healing, forgiveness, and inspiration.

Though the two men could have sued Philadelphia — especially after both the mayor and the police commissioner admitted that the situation hadn't been handled correctly — they agreed to a settlement no one expected. Each man accepted a symbolic $1 from the city. In addition, The Washington Post reports, they've asked Philadelphia to fund a $200,000 grant to support area high school students with entrepreneurial dreams. According to ABC News, the mens' arrest records will be expunged. Starbucks, for their part, will pay for Nelson and Robinson's college education as part of a mostly undisclosed financial settlement. The pair will meet with former Attorney General Eric Holder, who's assisting Starbucks in creating a training on racial bias.

The injustice was horrific. For many it brought two things into stark relief for the first time.

One: Racial bias and discrimination happen on a moment-to-moment basis in America.

While some still argue that Nelson and Robinson must have done something wrong in order to have been escorted out by police (just check the comments on any news story about their arrest), the reality is the only thing the two men were guilty of was being on the wrong end of someone's prejudice. And that kind of prejudice makes what happened to Nelson and Robinson an everyday occurrence.  

Shortly after the Nelson and Robinson's story blew up, a piece in The New York Times detailed the many incidents of racial bias that had occurred in the Rittenhouse Square area of Philadelphia — where the men had been arrested.

"Although black people account for just 3% of the residents in that police subdistrict, they made up two-thirds of the people stopped by the police in the first half of 2017, according to figures collected by the American Civil Liberties Union," The Times reported.  

Protestors at a Philadelphia Starbucks rally against the discrimination of Nelson and Robinson. Photo by Mark Makela/Getty Images.

Two: We must all work to end this type of commonplace oppression.

After the president and CEO of Starbucks met with the men to offer an apology, Starbucks announced that it would close 8,000 of its stores on May 29 for "racial bias training." While one day is hardly enough time to transform the crisis of systemic racism, the training is one step in ensuring that what the manager did doesn't happen again.

"What Starbucks is doing shows an understanding that to dismiss one employee as a crazy racist is to ignore the context in which that individual learns beliefs, pushes them on others, and abuses power. Using this as a teachable moment company-wide also sets an example," author Sara Benincasa wrote in a tweet.  

Nelson and Robinson's hope? That something positive comes from such a terrible incident.

"We thought long and hard about it, and we feel like this is the best way to see that change that we want to see," Robinson, said of the settlement. "It's not a right-now thing that's good for right now, but I feel like we will see the true change over time."

From Your Site Articles
More

Starbucks' social media team sets an important tone addressing racial bias.

"We cannot deny that this is a race issue."

On April 12, two black men were arrested while waiting for their friend at a Starbucks in Philadelphia. Their crime? Waiting for a friend, apparently.

The incident, caught on film, shows the two men being placed in handcuffs by police officers while confused customers tried to ask what exactly they had done wrong. The incident sparked a lot of justifiable anger and resulted in an apology from both Starbucks, and the Philadelphia police chief, a few days later.

At NBC, writer Elon James White shared an "uncomfortable truth for white America" about the incident.

"While this incident went viral, it is only remarkable because of how unremarkable it actually is," he wrote, highlighting another Starbucks video from California showing a black man being denied access to a store's restroom, while a white man was allowed in without scrutiny.

People protesting at the Starbucks where the two men were arrested. Photo by Mark Makela/Getty Images.

Starbucks announced plans to close all 8,000 of the company's corporate owned stores on May 29 for mandatory racial-bias training.

In a statement posted to Facebook, the company explained they were working with well-established civil rights advocates and anti-racism organizations to develop a curriculum for its 175,000 employees. The plan has gotten some majorly mixed reactions, ranging from people arguing that the Philadelphia location and police did nothing wrong, to those who think this is an important step in addressing the issue, to people who believe this is simply too little, too late.

All screenshots are from Starbucks/Facebook.

Whether the training itself will be considered a success remains to be seen. Still, the company's responses on social media have an important lesson for us all.

A lot of the time, when a company finds itself in the midst of a public relations disaster, their social media teams will come up with a few canned statements to respond to criticism on social media. Starbucks took a different approach — and has been offering personal replies to dozens of people.

Responding to criticism arguing that the Philadelphia incident was just a few bad apples, the company replied, "Because systemic racism and bias is bigger than one partner, one store or one company. We are shutting our stores for this training because we recognize that we have the responsibility to be part of the solution."

Others lamented the thought of going without their coffee for an afternoon, saying that the company's response was overblown. To that, Starbucks owned up to its less than stellar history, writing, "There are countless examples of implicit bias resulting in discrimination against people of color, both inside and outside our stores," and explaining that they have a responsibility to act.

"There was no reason for the police to be called to our Philadelphia store," they wrote to another commenter.

Another commenter used this as an opportunity to highlight legitimate grievances people and communities of color might have with law enforcement. The company responded by saying there are plans to meet with Philadelphia government and law enforcement officials to ensure this doesn't happen again. While it's not a national solution, it is something.

When someone pointed out that it shouldn't have taken a viral video for the company to get serious about fighting racial bias, Starbucks responded that the program rolling out May 29 will become part of new employee onboarding moving forward.

"Maybe train your employees on how to deal with loitering in general and not make it a color issue?" wrote another commenter. The company responded, "We cannot deny this is a race issue, which is why we are implementing this training."

Generally speaking, people should avoid calling the police in all but the most extreme cases, and Starbucks made its position on that clear in one of the responses, writing, "While there are situations where a call to police is justified (such as violence or aggressive behavior), this was not one of them."

The company was rightly wary of accepting praise for doing something it should have been doing all along. "We hope this proves to be an impactful step — one of many we know we have to take."

Yes, the manager who called the police has been fired.

Racism and unconscious biases are very real, and we'd all benefit from taking a step back and examining our own.

If one good thing comes out of what happened in Philadelphia, it's the chance for those who are white — and can't possibly know what it's like to be made to feel unwelcome in public spaces or to have our existence treated as automatically criminal on the basis of our skin color — to see the "uncomfortable truth" James mentioned in his article. This isn't a one-off incident, and it's not limited to just Starbucks. This is an everyday reality for many people of color. It's on all of us to push for a better world and to work to be our best selves.

What happened to those two men should never happen again. It almost certainly will, but it shouldn't. Take a page out of the Starbucks social media team's playbook and recognize this is a cultural problem that we have a responsibility to address — and then hold yourself accountable for your actions.

Trending Stories