I don't think that Val or I either one are arguing for the abolishment of real differences in potential (which I'd argue that genetics plays into).
I actually have some misgivings regarding the removal of the asterisk from the SAT scores, for just this reason, in fact. There are some things that a slow processing speed or profound verbal learning disability make one less suitable for, after all. Those differences make a difference in the end, and without coping skills to compensate and level the playing field for one's self, well-- I think that pretty much anyone can understand why an airline pilot or emergency room physician can't get "time and a half" to accomodate that difference.
Some differences matter and they should probably matter because they are directly related to potential ability and its development.
The problem is that we've moved so far from a real meritocratic system that we are NOT getting our highest potential kids into the programs and disciplines that need to weed everyone else out.
That's a problem for everyone, and it's a terrible waste of resources to boot. Kids who only LOOK that good because of what their parents have done shouldn't be sucking up seats and resources that high potential kids could use to escape poverty.
I don't think that there is a perfect system. But this has gone unchecked for too long and it seems to have spiraled way out of control, quite frankly.
