Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:08 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogSosoth View Post
So after a period of benefiting from affirmative action, now this group of them wants to eliminate it. Its selfish
When did Asians benefit from affirmative action?
  #252  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:09 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
I'll go on the record of opposing quotas while being for Affirmative Action, in general. I think racial quotas are, in fact, racial discrimination (and I don't think Affirmative Action is).

I thought I was clear that I was speaking of Affirmative Action, and not racial quotas. If this was unclear, I apologize deeply.
  #253  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:10 PM
Terr is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 12,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I've noticed that pretty much all pro-racism arguments are incoherent.
I guess so. See post #240.
  #254  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:18 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm certainly open to the possibility that modern society discriminates against Asians in such a way that makes it more difficult for them to succeed than white people (or others). But the facts that, according to statistics that I've seen, Asians are significantly over-represented among high-scorers, high-achievers, in prestigious universities, in income and other financial indicators, etc., are indications that they are not discriminated against significantly in terms of educational opportunity, from what I understand.

"Over-represented" and "discriminated against" aren't mutually exclusive.

African-Americans are overrepresented in the NBA. If the NBA were to institute a policy, "African-Americans must jump 10% higher and run 10% faster than Asians in order to get into the NBA," chances are the NBA would still be predominantly black. But it would be discrimination.


Same for university admissions. Asian-Americans are overrepresented at elite U.S. universities. And yet Asian-Americans have to score higher on standardized testing than other racial groups. It's discrimination.
  #255  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:19 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'll go on the record of opposing quotas while being for Affirmative Action, in general. I think racial quotas are, in fact, racial discrimination (and I don't think Affirmative Action is).

I thought I was clear that I was speaking of Affirmative Action, and not racial quotas. If this was unclear, I apologize deeply.
Yeah - sorry, I thought you were supporting quotas - I get it. My bad.
  #256  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:28 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Ultimately, what causes everyone to fight about AA/merit is that you can only fit so many people into a population of 100%. Increase one race's representation by 5% and other races are bound to take a hit. Its a zero sum situation.
  #257  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:37 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Same for university admissions. Asian-Americans are overrepresented at elite U.S. universities. And yet Asian-Americans have to score higher on standardized testing than other racial groups. It's discrimination.
It would be discrimination if it were true. It isn't. It's a specious claim that is one of the weaknesses of their case. The reality is that everyone admitted to Harvard has to have high test scores -- that's the minimal condition to even be considered. There are enormous numbers of other standards and criteria that are applied on top of the minimal requirements. It turns out that when all those criteria are applied, the Asians who end up getting admitted have higher test scores than the average. As I already said, Grutter v. Bollinger determined in 2003 that such an outcome is neither discrimination nor any kind of "thinly veiled quota system". And comparisons with anti-Semitism in the 1920s is not just specious but downright absurd.
  #258  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:43 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
Grutter found that using a racial multiplier is legal.

That doesn't address your claim that Harvard uses no racial multiplier, or any claim about whether it's moral. It's irrelevant.
  #259  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:44 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
And it's comparable because, unlike any argument for "rectifying past discrimination" by applying racial multipliers to benefit blacks, the Harvard system's intent and effect is to handicap a racial minority for the benefit of rich whites. It's much closer to the Jewish quota than the Michigan system.
  #260  
Old 05-19-2015, 01:47 PM
Terr is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 12,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
It would be discrimination if it were true. It isn't. It's a specious claim that is one of the weaknesses of their case. The reality is that everyone admitted to Harvard has to have high test scores -- that's the minimal condition to even be considered.
And it's just a coincidence that in order to be admitted, statistically, Asians have to score 450 more points on SAT than blacks, right?
Quote:
There are enormous numbers of other standards and criteria that are applied on top of the minimal requirements. It turns out that when all those criteria are applied, the Asians who end up getting admitted have higher test scores than the average.
Ah I see. Just a coincidence. 450 points. Everyone has high scores - it's just that Asians have to have much higher to get admitted.
  #261  
Old 05-19-2015, 02:03 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terr View Post
Yeah, because Cambridge, that does not take into account any "compelling life stories" about "adversity" is not one of the best, is it?
How do you know that they don't take any of that into account? There is information in the essay, and also imparted in the interview.
  #262  
Old 05-19-2015, 02:12 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Except that Asians are a minority, too.
And here in California, whites are a minority in the University of California system.
  #263  
Old 05-19-2015, 02:43 PM
Terr is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 12,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Algher View Post
How do you know that they don't take any of that into account? There is information in the essay, and also imparted in the interview.
I cited their web page

http://www.undergraduate.study.cam.a...rviews-involve
The main focus of interviews is to explore your academic potential, motivation and suitability for your chosen course. Questions are designed to assess your:

problem-solving abilities
assimilation of new ideas and information
intellectual flexibility and analytical reasoning

It’s important for you to remember that interviewers won’t be trying to ‘catch you out’, but will be challenging you to think for yourself and show how you can apply your existing knowledge and skills laterally to unfamiliar problems.

Interviews help selectors to gauge how you would respond to the teaching methods used at Cambridge. Interviews are similar in many ways to supervisions.
... and
Are extra-curricular activities taken into account?

While achievements in particular extra-curricular activities may be impressive, getting an offer of a place isn't influenced by them. However, interviewers often ask about other interests or experience that you mention in your application where they're of relevance to the course that you intend to study.
Can you show me where the "compelling life story" comes in? Let's say you want to study chemistry at Cambridge. How exactly will the story about overcoming being fat, gay and Mexican going to help you?
  #264  
Old 05-19-2015, 03:12 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Because I have been an admissions officer for a graduate program, I know the games that can be played on both sides of the table.

"show how you can apply your existing knowledge and skills laterally to unfamiliar problems" can be used to show how overcoming the one challenge (being a fat, gay Mexican) means that when I hit a lab exercise with what seems to be an insurmountable problem, I won't quit. I will experiment until I defeat it.

Interestingly enough, one of the problems we see with grad students in STEM is that they have spent too much of their life avoiding any sign of failure - which keeps them from being great researchers and experimenters in the graduate program. Those who do NOT fail, tend to fail out of the PhD program.

If Cambridge truly did not care about a personal statement, they would not ask for one. If they wanted to keep it all out of the discussion, they would not have an interview. That adds a significant, difficult to measure, human element to the review process for admissions.

Now - if you can show me that Cambridge only uses the scores, or that the interview counts for naught, or that the personal statement is not read, etc. - I welcome the information.

Most universities are extremely circumspect in their evaluation criteria. Individual admissions officers are even tighter. You can find the admissions files of hundreds of admitted candidates, and thousands of rejected ones, with my signature. What you will NOT find is any notes in the files from me aside from a few checkmarks. I only had to be subpoenaed once before I developed a system of nothing of note that could be easily interpreted (the subpoena was for a divorce case).
  #265  
Old 05-19-2015, 03:42 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terr View Post
And it's just a coincidence that in order to be admitted, statistically, Asians have to score 450 more points on SAT than blacks, right?

Ah I see. Just a coincidence. 450 points. Everyone has high scores - it's just that Asians have to have much higher to get admitted.
(emphasis mine)
Can you give me a cite for this "have to" claim you keep making? Where does it say that? What I read in that article is that Asians as a group score higher on SATs than other groups. We already knew that. So I would expect the subset of Asians as a group who are admitted to have higher scores than other groups. I don't know what you would expect, or why you would expect some mathematical oddity to occur.

Which is one reason they got nowhere in the 1980s complaint, and will likely get nowhere with this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terr View Post
...Let's say you want to study chemistry at Cambridge. How exactly will the story about overcoming being fat, gay and Mexican going to help you?
Let's say you have a problem while studying chemistry at Cambridge. And you have to overcome it.

Last edited by wolfpup; 05-19-2015 at 03:47 PM.
  #266  
Old 05-19-2015, 04:58 PM
YogSothoth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
"Asians are selfish" -- the attribution of negative characteristics to an entire race -- is not racist according to you, I presume?
"The" Asians, as in the ones specifically suing to overturn the racial quotas. So no, not racist, just a descriptive statement of their legal maneuvers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
The beneficiaries of the Asian quota at Harvard are rich white people.
Cite?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
At what point in time do you believe there was affirmative action in favor of Asians at Harvard?
That's a biased question. Instead ask at what point in time there was AA in favor of non-whites. The answer is: When such quotas were created, reducing the dominance of whites in these schools and creating a diverse student body

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
When the goal of "having a racially diverse campus" only arose after Harvard noticed Asians taking spots that used to go to whites, and is implemented in a manner that changes on an annual basis to achieve the end of creating a formula that caps Asian enrollment, then it becomes as hollow as "holistic criteria."
I have no problems with Harvard maintaining a diverse student body by limiting enrollment based on race. Ideally, given Harvard's demographics, I would like them to reduce the Asian enrollment and accept more blacks and latinos to more closely match the population demographics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
When did Asians benefit from affirmative action?
Like I said, at one point, whites held all the enrollment in the top schools. AA was created in part to lessen that inequality and it has worked. It still continues to work by creating a diverse student body. Please don't pretend it has never happened, its silly and ignorant.
  #267  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:08 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogSosoth View Post
Like I said, at one point, whites held all the enrollment in the top schools. AA was created in part to lessen that inequality and it has worked. It still continues to work by creating a diverse student body. Please don't pretend it has never happened, its silly and ignorant.
I asked about Asians benefiting from AA. Not other races. Asians.
  #268  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:10 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogSosoth View Post
That's a biased question. Instead ask at what point in time there was AA in favor of non-whites. The answer is: When such quotas were created, reducing the dominance of whites in these schools and creating a diverse student body
You're arguing for policies which artificially give less qualified whites places over Asians. Have you forgotten?

Quote:
I have no problems with Harvard maintaining a diverse student body by limiting enrollment based on race. Ideally, given Harvard's demographics, I would like them to reduce the Asian enrollment and accept more blacks and latinos to more closely match the population demographics
Harvard already gives a massive boost to black students. Right now, the average score needed to get into Harvard as a black applicant is the same as that required to get into the University of Nebraska as a white applicant. Sure, they could lower the standard even further. But the ACTUAL TOPIC of the lawsuit and this thread is the penalty applied to Asians to let in more whites.

Quote:
Like I said, at one point, whites held all the enrollment in the top schools. AA was created in part to lessen that inequality and it has worked. It still continues to work by creating a diverse student body. Please don't pretend it has never happened, its silly and ignorant.
The topic of this thread is Harvard preserving a "diverse student body" by excluding Asians in favor of whites. Their affirmative action program for blacks is both substantial (again, it's easier to get into Harvard if you're black than get into Michigan or Virginia if you're white) and not being questioned here.

Are you so in love with the concept of affirmative action for blacks that you feel compelled to defend anything labeled "affirmative action" by someone, or do you actually think that it would be harmful for Harvard to become "too Asian?"

Last edited by Haberdash; 05-19-2015 at 05:14 PM.
  #269  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:12 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
No, I said that AA is not necessarily racial discrimination.
How can that possibly be? If I use only objective factors in admissions, then there is one set of racial characteristics of a class.

I then apply a new type of review that focuses on race, for the sole purpose of adjusting the racial makeup of the class, and then it does in fact alter the racial makeup of the class. Because of my new type of review that focuses on race I have now, as was my intention, kept some out of the class and admitted others with the determinate factor being race.

It has a racially discriminatory purpose and outcome and its stated goal is to discriminate based upon race, but you claim that it isn't "necessarily" racial discrimination? You might say it is good and necessary racial discrimination, but I don't know how you can say it isn't racial discrimination.
  #270  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:14 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
The topic of this thread is Harvard preserving a "diverse student body" by excluding Asians in favor of whites. Their affirmative action program for blacks is both substantial (again, it's easier to get into Harvard if you're black then get into Michigan or Virginia if you're white) and not being questioned here.
I thought it was just about discriminating against Asians - nothing in the OP seemed to say that it was whites who were winning. When the University of California changed their rules via Prop 209 - Asians came out with higher representation, whites stayed fairly level, and it was Hispanics and African Americans who seemed to come out at a loss.

This is not an Asian vs. White fight.
  #271  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:16 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I said that AA is not necessarily racial discrimination.
I think you may be thinking of "discrimination" only in a negative/against sense. It's not necessarily. Promoting people because of their race is also a form of discrimination - you might call it positive discrimination.

Last edited by Velocity; 05-19-2015 at 05:16 PM.
  #272  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:20 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
It's an "Asian plaintiffs vs. the specific whites who benefit from the policy" thing. If the only thing Harvard changes is removing the Asian quota/penalty, then more Asians will get in, and the people displaced will be less qualified white applicants.
  #273  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:27 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I think you may be thinking of "discrimination" only in a negative/against sense. It's not necessarily. Promoting people because of their race is also a form of discrimination - you might call it positive discrimination.
But in a zero sum game like college admissions, when you promote someone because of their race, you necessarily demote another person because of his race.
  #274  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:33 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtgain View Post
But in a zero sum game like college admissions, when you promote someone because of their race, you necessarily demote another person because of his race.
Well, exactly. But because it's more indirect, people don't care or mind as much.


Saying, "Let's increase enrollment of Race A!" sounds much better than, "Let's reduce enrollment of Races B, C, D, and E."
  #275  
Old 05-19-2015, 05:50 PM
Ibn Warraq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
Harvard already gives a massive boost to black students. Right now, the average score needed to get into Harvard as a black applicant is the same as that required to get into the University of Nebraska as a white applicant.
Ok, I'd really like to see a cite which shows that it's as easy for a black applicant to get into Harvard as a white applicant to get into the University of Nebraska.

I find that ridiculous and hard to believe.

The closest I can think of too anything remotely like that was a report from a whistle-blower at Cornell from the early 90s showing the average SAT scores of African-American students admitted to Cornell was 1070 while the average SAT score of white students admitted was 1270 but that was over 20 years ago and was Cornell not Harvard.
  #276  
Old 05-19-2015, 06:26 PM
Terr is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 12,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
Ok, I'd really like to see a cite which shows that it's as easy for a black applicant to get into Harvard as a white applicant to get into the University of Nebraska.

I find that ridiculous and hard to believe.

The closest I can think of too anything remotely like that was a report from a whistle-blower at Cornell from the early 90s showing the average SAT scores of African-American students admitted to Cornell was 1070 while the average SAT score of white students admitted was 1270 but that was over 20 years ago and was Cornell not Harvard.
I don't know about the average SAT scores of African Americans admitted to Harvard - Harvard does not publish this data.

But here is an interesting tidbit:

http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_coll...ions-test.html
If we raise the top-scoring threshold to students scoring 750 or above on both the math and verbal SAT — a level equal to the mean score of students entering the nation's most selective colleges such as Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech — we find that in the entire country 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test.

Nationwide, 33,841 students scored at least 750 on the math test and 30,479 scored at least 750 on the verbal SAT.

In a race-neutral competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students at the nation's 25 top-ranked universities, high-scoring blacks would be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-black students. Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there are about 3,000 black first-year students matriculating at these 25 high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top of the SAT scoring scale. As shown previously, black students make up at best between 1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups.
It is taken as an obvious given by this article that the competition for those places is not race-neutral. As anyone who looked at that data would be forced to admit.
  #277  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:04 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I asked about Asians benefiting from AA. Not other races. Asians.
Given that they get higher SAT scores than any other group and manage to get in to elite universities out of all proportion to their population, and they do this all by themselves, just exactly what sort of affirmative action benefits do you think they should be given?
  #278  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:07 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
Given that they get higher SAT scores than any other group and manage to get in to elite universities out of all proportion to their population, and they do this all by themselves, just exactly what sort of affirmative action benefits do you think they should be given?
That wasn't the question. He was asking how past affirmative action benefited Asians.
  #279  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:27 PM
monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,799
According to this article, Fillipinos, Cambodians, Pacific Islanders are among the Asian Americans who benefit from policies that take ethnicity into account.

And I can attest to this personally. I received funding in graduate school through NIH targeted at minorities (particularly those from communities with health disparities). One of my lab-mates received funding through this program too. He was Fillipino.

I was in a program in undergrad designed to help minority students matriculate (it was run out of the Office of Minority Education and Development). There were Asian students in this program, albeit very few.

Last edited by monstro; 05-19-2015 at 07:27 PM.
  #280  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:27 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi View Post
That wasn't the question. He was asking how past affirmative action benefited Asians.
I know what he's asking. And I answered it by pointing out how ridiculous the question is. AA hasn't benefited rich white guys, either.
  #281  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:28 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
Given that they get higher SAT scores than any other group and manage to get in to elite universities out of all proportion to their population, and they do this all by themselves, just exactly what sort of affirmative action benefits do you think they should be given?
That's my point. Yogsosoth is arguing that AA helped Asians in the past, but I think many of them got in on merit.

Last edited by Velocity; 05-19-2015 at 07:32 PM.
  #282  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:30 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
It's an "Asian plaintiffs vs. the specific whites who benefit from the policy" thing. If the only thing Harvard changes is removing the Asian quota/penalty, then more Asians will get in, and the people displaced will be less qualified white applicants.
Why are whites the only ones? If Harvard went down the same path as the UC system - I would expect whites to break even, Asians to come out ahead, and other minorities to be the losers.

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_235167...15-years-later
Quote:
Black, Latino and Native American students made up almost 54 percent of California's high school graduates in 2012 -- but just 27 percent of all freshmen, UC-wide, and 16 percent of UC Berkeley's freshmen class that year.
  #283  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:32 PM
monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
I know what he's asking. And I answered it by pointing out how ridiculous the question is. AA hasn't benefited rich white guys, either.
Unless they have a white mother who has worked outside of the home.
  #284  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:35 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Algher View Post
Why are whites the only ones? If Harvard went down the same path as the UC system - I would expect whites to break even, Asians to come out ahead, and other minorities to be the losers.
Because we're talking about the specific policies at Harvard which penalize Asian applicants in order to preserve spots for white ones, not about ending affirmative action for blacks there.
  #285  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:36 PM
Terr is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 12,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Algher View Post
Why are whites the only ones? If Harvard went down the same path as the UC system - I would expect whites to break even, Asians to come out ahead, and other minorities to be the losers.
Wrong. As I cited already (and will repeat below) minority students were not "losers" in the UC case:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...action/263122/

A powerful example of these problems comes from UCLA, an elite school that used large racial preferences until the Proposition 209 ban took effect in 1998. The anticipated, devastating effects of the ban on preferences at UCLA and Berkeley on minorities were among the chief exhibits of those who attacked Prop 209 as a racist measure. Many predicted that over time blacks and Hispanics would virtually disappear from the UCLA campus.
...
Throughout these crises, university administrators constantly fed agitation against the preference ban by emphasizing the drop in undergraduate minority admissions. Never did the university point out one overwhelming fact: The total number of black and Hispanic students receiving bachelor's degrees were the same for the five classes after Prop 209 as for the five classes before.

How was this possible? First, the ban on preferences produced better-matched students at UCLA, students who were more likely to graduate. The black four-year graduation rate at UCLA doubled from the early 1990s to the years after Prop 209.

Second, strong black and Hispanic students accepted UCLA offers of admission at much higher rates after the preferences ban went into effect; their choices seem to suggest that they were eager to attend a school where the stigma of a preference could not be attached to them. This mitigated the drop in enrollment.

Third, many minority students who would have been admitted to UCLA with weak qualifications before Prop 209 were admitted to less elite schools instead; those who proved their academic mettle were able to transfer up to UCLA and graduate there.
  #286  
Old 05-19-2015, 07:58 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
I'd just like to remind everyone that removing race on the application isn't going to prevent racial discrimination, especially since 1) names are an accurate predictor of one's cultural background and 2) top-tier universities often hold in-person interviews for applicants.

But having "color-blind" applications is a GREAT way of hiding racial discrimination, though. It's a way for an institution to maintain plausible deniability.
It's already been suggested that numbers be assigned. It's a simple process to list the metrics used for acceptance ahead of time and choose the highest rated applicant who meets the criteria.

"Holistic" is just another word for discrimination.
  #287  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:01 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
A metric-based approach discriminates against people from disadvantage backgrounds--students who through no fault of their own were not able to take a slate of AP courses or SAT prep classes.
You seem to think that wholistic admissions treats students from non-affluent backgrounds well. I don't:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...841711416.html

Quote:
Only 3.8 percent of American families make more than $200,000 per year. But at Harvard University, 45.6 percent of incoming freshman come from families making $200,000 or more. A mere 4 percent of Harvard students come from a family in the bottom quintile of US incomes, and only 17.8 percent come from the bottom three quintiles. . . .

they fill their ranks with the children of the elite portrayed in Miller's article - elites who drop hundreds of thousands of dollars on private schools, exorbitant "enrichment" activities, and personal tutors that almost no Americans can afford.
As for SAT prep, I wish it didn't exist, but I don't think it is as big a barrier as you seem to think:

http://www.realclearscience.com/arti...es_106250.html

Most of the prep factor could and should be remedied by giving a plus factor to high scores and advanced placement earned by a students at high schools where scores tend to be low. This might seem an unrealistic option today. But if, by some chance, the Asian Americans won, Harvard administrators would have to find a race-neutral way to express their egalitarian impulses. And I think they are smart enough to do it.

Last edited by PhillyGuy; 05-19-2015 at 08:06 PM.
  #288  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:08 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
But having "color-blind" applications is a GREAT way of hiding racial discrimination, though. It's a way for an institution to maintain plausible deniability.
The same is true of "holistic," though. Virtually anything can be concealed behind "holistic."
  #289  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:09 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
I'd just like to remind everyone that removing race on the application isn't going to prevent racial discrimination, especially since 1) names are an accurate predictor of one's cultural background and 2) top-tier universities often hold in-person interviews for applicants.
They can always find a way discriminate. But they shouldn't.
  #290  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:11 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
Because we're talking about the specific policies at Harvard which penalize Asian applicants in order to preserve spots for white ones, not about ending affirmative action for blacks there.
Prove that is to preserve slots for white students. Maybe Harvard gives those slots to Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans. Or maybe they save it those slots for Catholics and Jews, and instead keep out the WASPs like the Supreme Court.


Last edited by Algher; 05-19-2015 at 08:15 PM. Reason: Meant to add a wink - sounded too much like a WASP Rights activist there.
  #291  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:14 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terr View Post
Wrong. As I cited already (and will repeat below) minority students were not "losers" in the UC case:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...action/263122/

A powerful example of these problems comes from UCLA, an elite school that used large racial preferences until the Proposition 209 ban took effect in 1998. The anticipated, devastating effects of the ban on preferences at UCLA and Berkeley on minorities were among the chief exhibits of those who attacked Prop 209 as a racist measure. Many predicted that over time blacks and Hispanics would virtually disappear from the UCLA campus.
...
Throughout these crises, university administrators constantly fed agitation against the preference ban by emphasizing the drop in undergraduate minority admissions. Never did the university point out one overwhelming fact: The total number of black and Hispanic students receiving bachelor's degrees were the same for the five classes after Prop 209 as for the five classes before.

How was this possible? First, the ban on preferences produced better-matched students at UCLA, students who were more likely to graduate. The black four-year graduation rate at UCLA doubled from the early 1990s to the years after Prop 209.

Second, strong black and Hispanic students accepted UCLA offers of admission at much higher rates after the preferences ban went into effect; their choices seem to suggest that they were eager to attend a school where the stigma of a preference could not be attached to them. This mitigated the drop in enrollment.

Third, many minority students who would have been admitted to UCLA with weak qualifications before Prop 209 were admitted to less elite schools instead; those who proved their academic mettle were able to transfer up to UCLA and graduate there.
Yes, the ones who got in graduated, maintaining an equivalent graduation rate, and you and others can claim that is better. I might even agree with you.

But it is also a fact that fewer applicants from the those groups (Black, Latino, Native American) were admitted, and those now open admission slots went to Asian candidates.

Quote:
The year Proposition 209 took effect, the admissions rate for black students applying to UC Berkeley fell from 47.8 percent to 19.7 percent; Latino students saw their admission rate go from 44.4 percent to 20.6 percent.
  #292  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:15 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
Right, but the point being, as in your other example of a particular subset of Asians getting assistance, the purpose of that kind of aid and of affirmative action specifically is to help the disadvantaged, particularly those disadvantaged because of a history of egregious injustices. It's assuredly not the purpose of AA to "help" those who are spectacularly successful at aggressively looking after themselves, get the highest test scores, and are over-represented in the top elite schools.

The article you linked contained an interesting link to a different article on the subject of why color-blind/racially-blind admissions policy is a terrible idea, specifically with regard to Asians, and written, incidentally, by an Asian. It makes three main points that I'll paraphrase loosely:

1. Merit is a lot more than just a number. [I feel like I must have said this at least half a dozen times by now!]
2. Diversity isn't just a nicety, it's a compelling national interest.
3. Instead of arguing about how to tweak the admissions proportions of the very limited capacities of the top colleges -- a zero-sum game in which some group loses for every group that wins -- we should be talking about maximizing opportunities for all.
  #293  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:22 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Algher View Post
Prove that is to preserve slots for white students. Maybe Harvard gives those slots to Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans. Or maybe they save it those slots for Catholics and Jews, and instead keep out the WASPs like the Supreme Court.
Harvard already sets aside spots for any black student who can demonstrate some preparedness for college. The people competing for the last spots in are Asians with qualifications X and whites with qualifications X * .9. Plus, of course, legacy admissions are overwhelmingly white.

The reality of the system as well as the purpose of it (to give white people from rich families more reason to donate money to Harvard) is that this is giving spots that would go to Asians under an objective system to less qualified whites.

Harvard could end the Asian quota without altering the affirmative action system for blacks, if they wanted. Pretending that it's impossible to end the anti-Asian quota without harming blacks is a smokescreen designed to spuriously turn the obvious white supremacy of the quota supporters back on the people saying that there should not be a white supremacist system.
  #294  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:27 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
The article you linked contained an interesting link to a different article on the subject of why color-blind/racially-blind admissions policy is a terrible idea, specifically with regard to Asians, and written, incidentally, by an Asian.
More saliently, written by a professional Democratic Party operative.

Quote:
1. Merit is a lot more than just a number. [I feel like I must have said this at least half a dozen times by now!]
When the formula for "merit" is adjusted on a yearly basis until it comes out with "less Jews" or "less Asians," then merit is far less than a number, it's a joke. That is what Harvard does. They do not have some grand vision of the well-rounded student that transcends test scores, they just have a goal -- keep Harvard white -- and a bunch of bumper stickers designed to give people who support this goal the thinnest pretext of not being racists.

Quote:
2. Diversity isn't just a nicety, it's a compelling national interest.
Not really, no.

Quote:
3. Instead of arguing about how to tweak the admissions proportions of the very limited capacities of the top colleges -- a zero-sum game in which some group loses for every group that wins -- we should be talking about maximizing opportunities for all.
The end of affirmative action in California maximized opportunities for all. But in any case, this is an irrelevant point -- Harvard can't plead "why are we talking about Harvard" in response to being sued. In a lawsuit, or thread, specifically about Harvard, we can and will talk about "the admissions proportions of the very limited capacities of the top colleges."
  #295  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:32 PM
Algher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
Harvard already sets aside spots for any black student who can demonstrate some preparedness for college. The people competing for the last spots in are Asians with qualifications X and whites with qualifications X * .9. Plus, of course, legacy admissions are overwhelmingly white.

The reality of the system as well as the purpose of it (to give white people from rich families more reason to donate money to Harvard) is that this is giving spots that would go to Asians under an objective system to less qualified whites.

Harvard could end the Asian quota without altering the affirmative action system for blacks, if they wanted. Pretending that it's impossible to end the anti-Asian quota without harming blacks is a smokescreen designed to spuriously turn the obvious white supremacy of the quota supporters back on the people saying that there should not be a white supremacist system.
Please. It has been whites against AA for years, because they felt that undeserving blacks and latinos were getting their slots.
- Bakke vs. the University of California - white plaintiff
- Hopwood vs. Texas - white plaintiff
- Gratz v Bollinger - white plaintiffs (in Michigan)

This is the same song, different plaintiffs. As California showed - drop race, and watch Asian admissions increase, white admissions stay steady, and black and latino admissions drop.
  #296  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:36 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
... Interesting thing about Cambridge though ... Asian applicants secured "AAA at A-level" at 78.8%, higher than the 74.8% for Whites. But Asian acceptance into Cambridge was 22.7% while White applicants were accepted at an 30.1% rate. Huh. They have that in common anyway!
I am reposting this as it was so roundly ignored. AAA at A-level means that students took 3 advanced level tests, essentially the qualifying tests for the U.K. college system, and scored top levels on all of the three they took.

Does Cambridge have a de facto quota? Do they discriminate against Asian students?
  #297  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:41 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdash View Post
... Asians with qualifications X and whites with qualifications X * .9 ...
... Harvard could end the Asian quota ...
... there should not be a white supremacist system.
Asians "have to" get higher scores than anyone else to get in -- check.
Harvard has an Asian quota -- check.
Harvard is run by white supremacists -- check.

Congratulations on hitting the trifecta in a single post!
  #298  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:45 PM
robert_columbia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terr View Post
...
I fully support the plaintiffs in this case. No, "test scores alone" do not entitle anyone to admissions at Harvard. But admissions have to be based on objective and non-racial criteria. Test scores are objective. If you can find other objective criteria, apply them. "Holistic process" and "diversity" are inherently subjective and as such should not be part of the criteria.
It does seem that white people such as myself are frequently irked that Affirmative Action seems to be targeted at everyone but us, to the apparent disregard of how many of my own ancestors have suffered over the centuries in various places. Many of them had it so bad that they decided that traveling thousands of miles to a place called "America" sounded like a good idea.

In other words, "diversity" ends up meaning "people other than you, because white men can't possibly be diverse in any way, even if they have an interesting and probably true story about how their great-great-grandma ran away from an orphanage in Cork during the middle of the Irish Famine, was kidnapped in Dublin and forced to work ten years as a servant for some rich English merchant, finally escaped by sneaking onto a boat to Philadelphia, but fell overboard during the voyage and washed ashore in Virginia Beach, where she was anally raped by a gang of French-Canadian sailors over a period of two or three weeks until she was rescued by my great-great-grandpa wielding an early 19th century musket and a quarterstaff."*.

*No, I made up that story. But I'm sure that plenty of ordinary white people today have that kind of adventure in their ancestry, somewhere.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emiliana View Post
If diversity were not a concern, far fewer young men would be admitted to competitive colleges and universities. Young women outshine young men according to the usual objective criteria.

Affirmative Action for Men
Quite interesting. Thanks.
  #299  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:45 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Does Cambridge have a de facto quota? Do they discriminate against Asian students?
It's obviously run by white supremacists.
  #300  
Old 05-19-2015, 08:46 PM
Haberdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Algher View Post
Please. It has been whites against AA for years, because they felt that undeserving blacks and latinos were getting their slots.
OK. In this case, it's Asians suing Harvard because Harvard has a pro-white, anti-Asian quota. I guess you can keep pretending this isn't the case even to the point of denying who filed the lawsuit. I literally can't stop you.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017