And when I turn in a bad year of work because my two sisters-in-law and their eight children have moved into my home, should my performance review reflect that, or should it be normed for my circumstances?
Here is exactly what I said: We need to ensure opportunity all along the educational path. The current US system is blindingly obviously tilted.
Furthermore examples of equality of opportunity were having equal access to previous tests, equal access to quiet study areas, and financial aid so that students didn’t have to take on full time jobs to afford college.
None of these included norming test scores or norming job performance measures.
> Scores should be normalized by income, stability of household, then holistic factors such as extraneous circumstances, health, etc.
Did you want to refer to hypothetical admission scores? There used to be US colleges that admitted on a points system (and some very low-prestige ones still do), but they've stopped doing that since giving objective points based on race was ruled illegal for public schools.
Stop your strawman arguments. I did not say the thing you quoted. Someone else may have but I didn’t. You can easily check that by looking at the commenters name beside a comment.
You responded to the question "Why should scores be normed?"; I think it's fair to interpret that as providing a reason, in your own mind, that scores should be normed. If you don't want "because" read into your answer to "why?", you need to bring up the fact that your comment is not intended as a response to its parent.
> How many times do I have to repeat myself?
Not as many times as you seem to want to. Why post three separate replies, all saying the same thing, within five minutes of each other?
Edit: I also said that there isn’t equality of opportunity for education in the US.