<p>Division 1 Football alone has ~100 athletes per team. That's probably more than the Golf, Tennis, Squash, Crew, Fencing teams combined.</p>
<p>But someone can't just say that minorities that seem less qualified get in over higher qualified people, the same thing does happen with white people--something has to set someone apart to diversify the pool of applicants. If they didn't look for any type of diversity then everyone with perfect scores and gpas etc. would be all the people occupying a college which would probably result in a boring campus.</p>
<p>Who is to say that a black or Hispanic won't succeed if they get in... that is what truly matters. AA isn't the best, but the applicant pool gets competitive... what can you do?</p>
<p>
[quote]
But the wind is going to have to blow a heck of a lot harder, and for a heck of a lot longer, before America's money-addicted and legacy-loving universities can be shamed into returning to what ought to have been their guiding principle all along: admitting people to university on the basis of their intellectual ability.
[/quote]
That would be quite telling--and very colleges would do it. One just needs to look at the racial breakdown at Stuyvesant to see how it would turn out.</p>
<p>Seven Reasons why AA is wrong:</p>
<p>1.) It gives an unfair advantage to minorities at the expense of White and Asian students. </p>
<p>2.) It rewards people based on an incontrollable factor: genetics. College Admissions should be based solely on people’s accomplishments, not the color of their skin, as this boost in college admissions isn’t earned.</p>
<p>3.) It has strayed away from its original purpose: to help impoverished minorities. If you’re a minority, no matter how much $ you have, you have an advantage over whites and Asians, even if the white or Asian is poorer than you. I have used this example several times here on CC but I think I should use it again. My cousin, who is half-black, got a free-ride to Rensselaer Polytech w/a 1300 SAT score. She isn’t impoverished; her family income is in the 6-figures. An Asian kid I know, whose parents make a lot less $ than my cousin’s, got nothing from RPI, despite the fact that he had a 1420 SAT and a better GPA than my cousin.</p>
<p>4.) It gives minorities the perception that they can “slack-off” a bit since the AA carriage will bring them to a college. This is unfortunate. I think that it AA was eliminated, minorities would realize that they have to work much harder to get into college since they wouldn’t have AA going for them. You would see a higher level of achievement in the minority community. It maybe even lead to a higher level in the white and Asians communities since they would have to compete against a higher-achieving minority group.</p>
<p>5.) It created the unfair stereotype that every minority student got into a college because of AA. This isn’t true, since there are minorities that earn their way in. However, because of AA, they are unfairly assumed to be “inferior” students.</p>
<p>6.) It contradicts the Civil Rights Movement, the same movement that it was created as a result of. Wasn’t Martin Luther King Jr’s message to judge a person by his/her character and deeds, not by his/her skin color? I don’t know about you, but I don’t see how giving an advantage to certain races and not others ties into King’s message.</p>
<p>7.) It “turned its back” on Asians. Back when AA first came out, it was beneficial to all minorities, including Asians. However, since they were very strong academically as a group, colleges became disproportionably Asian (15% college population vs. 4% U.S. population). Therefore, the government decided that Asians shouldn’t have AA going for them. This is the reward they got for their high achievement.</p>
<p>Chris Rock has it right. In America, if you're black, you can succeed, and you can become wealthy, but if you put just one toe out of line, you will be destroyed. Only whites can cheat and scam their way to the top. That is why you have half the country just foaming at the mouth at the thought of under-qualified blacks at Harvard and Yale, but the millionaire dumbass white kid get a free pass. </p>
<p>Am I a fan of AA? No. But get rid of legacies first and then we'll talk.</p>
<p>A millionaire dumbass white kid doesn't deprive a spot for black kids. They deprive a spot for other white kids...</p>
<p>As an African American I know that AA is not fair but many of the above comments make it seem as though because of AA African Americans are automatically allowed into the top universities. This is not true, I know that I have to work hard every day and I now that my spot at NYU is defiantly NOT guaranteed. </p>
<p>Truth be told the education system was not designed for African Americans to excel in. Think about it, who wrote you math text book, your physics book? Caucasian Americans. I don’t want to go any farther into a rant but the education system is not fair with or with out AA.</p>
<p>nbachris2788 I agree with you, this is very true</p>
<p>
[quote]
Truth be told the education system was not designed for African Americans to excel in. Think about it, who wrote you math text book, your physics book? Caucasian Americans. I don’t want to go any farther into a rant but the education system is not fair with or with out AA.
[/quote]
So wait...when I get a book written by an asian american I now have an excuse to poorly perform? I'm not sure what your point is.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Truth be told the education system was not designed for African Americans to excel in. Think about it, who wrote you math text book, your physics book? Caucasian Americans. I don’t want to go any farther into a rant but the education system is not fair with or with out AA.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My goodness...so can I ***** and moan that most are written by males and I'm just an ignorant little female that can't possibly hope to comprehend such foreign thoughts as well as my male peers? That makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever. </p>
<p>Ugh, crap like that paired with the "our relatives had it oh-so-terrible" and "univeristies will become overwhelmingly white" excuses just makes me want to smack someone! </p>
<p>But hey, keep on advocating seperate but equal education for minorities because of their "gross educational disadvantage" since that's not three steps back at all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
America is not far removed from being an intensely racist nation, with whites leading the charge
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, please. America is the most racist nation in the world and all the whites should die.</p>
<p>Demographically, whites should be leading the charge. Blacks only account for 11% of the population.</p>
<p>Legacy admissions, although just as corrupt as AA, are practically impossible to eliminate. As long as there are people with $, there will always be underqualified students whose parents buy them a seat in colleges. However, AA is a system passed by the government that can be done away with. </p>
<p>Nbachris, you act like minorties are the only victims of legacy admisions. As Mr. Payne said, low-income white and Asians are also victims of it, maybe even more than minorities because they don'ty have AA going for them.</p>
<p>For everyone who thinks that Whites somehow benefit from AA, open your eyes. The U.S. is over 80% white (80.4% according to the 2000 census), yet most of the top universities are nowhere near this percentage. Just by running a College Board search of the Ivies, you get these percentages for whites at the Ivies:</p>
<p>Harvard: 47%
Yale: 48%
Princeton: 60%
UPenn: 47%
Dartmouth: 60%
Columbia: 47%
Brown: 50%
Cornell: 54%</p>
<p>Conclusion: AA hurts whites more than $ helps them. Not all white people are rich!</p>
<p>MissTycoon, your argument about the education system is idiotic. Basically what your saying is that it is harder for blacks because the education system was designed by whites. This is like saying that white people can't eat peanut butter because George Washington Carver invented it. I guess white people can't listen to rap music either because it was "designed" for black people.</p>
<p>Bump.............</p>
<p>Legacy admits are vital for colleges. In my expereince, not all legacies are admitted to Ivys (they have about a 1/3 admit rate at best) and even some very wealthy and generous alumni see their mediocre children rejected. Only the truly wealthy who can donate millions upon millions can buy their children's way into their alma maters, but there are so few of these people that it really should not affect your chances of getting into a college. If legacies feel that their children have no chance of getting into their alma maters, they will be a lot less likely to donate and give back to the university. Without donations by alums, colleges are hurt in many ways. It decreases their ability to give need based aid, fund special programs, etc. Colleges spend millions on football to attract donations from alumni. Why is it wrong for colleges to make it easier for legacies to get into college if alum donations go towards valuable things?</p>
<p>Also, the college board numbers must be off. I went to Penn's website and for the class of 2010, they have 41% minority, and over half is Asian (24% of the total class). 59% of the class of 2010 at Penn is white. Penn is also 9% black and 8% hispanic.</p>
<p>CNN reports: University of Michigan drops it's Affirmative Action Policy. 01/11/2007</p>
<p>
[quote]
For everyone who thinks that Whites somehow benefit from AA, open your eyes.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think they benefit from it, but compared to Asians, they're much less affected by it. Those "underqualified" minorities are most likely taking places away from Asian students, as opposed to whites. So whites shouldn't play the victim card so vehemently when it comes to college admissions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
MissTycoon, your argument about the education system is idiotic. Basically what your saying is that it is harder for blacks because the education system was designed by whites. This is like saying that white people can't eat peanut butter because George Washington Carver invented it. I guess white people can't listen to rap music either because it was "designed" for black people.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that it's a ridiculous point. ESL students who barely speak English can still excel academically, but black American students can't understand the "white language"? C'mon. That's a racist notion in itself, that blacks and whites are so fundamentally different in thinking that there's no way that they can even comprehend each other.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Legacy admits are vital for colleges.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In a way, I agree. If Harvard has to admit 5 trust fund babies so that in the future, it can award scholarships to 500 deserving kids, then I'd say the trade-off is worth it. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if Harvard has to admit a black slam poet from the ghetto for more racial/cultural reasons rather than academic ones, just to expand the campus point-of-view from Martha's Vineyard and weekend yachting, then I say that's worth it too.</p>
<p>Affirmative action, in the context of ameliorating for past racism and injustices, should exist to help blacks and Hispanics in the lowest socio-economic rung.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, AA ends up disproportionately helping upper middle class or affluent blacks and Hispanics. Why should a black or Hispanic applicant - who has access to the best schools, prep courses, etc. get an advantage - esp. since they already come from the advantaged class (what disadvantages do they have)?</p>
<p>Plus, there are often too many games played with AA. For instance, white applicants with a Hispanic parent or grandparent (usually a white Hispanic) often will put down Hispanic as their "race" (Hispanic isn't a race - hence the problem) in order to get that extra advantage.</p>
<p>Ironically, a growing no. of schools are using AA with regard to male applicants (mostly affecting white male applicants).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I found that statement extremely funny for some reason.</p>
<p>"I don't think they benefit from it, but compared to Asians, they're much less affected by it. Those "underqualified" minorities are most likely taking places away from Asian students, as opposed to whites. So whites shouldn't play the victim card so vehemently when it comes to college admissions."</p>
<p>Who ever said that AA just applied to college admissions? It also works against whites in the job market. Well-educated and well-qualified minorities are heavily sought after by employers because they want a diverse work-force to attract more customers and potential employees. While this principle may seem sensible on the surface, it usually results in potential white employees who are just as qualified as minorities (if not more qualified) not getting hired. </p>
<p>Here’s an example:</p>
<p>A few years back, my cousin (not half black as my other cousin is) was preparing to take the Police Department exam to be promoted to a Sergeant. He studied rigorously for the exam and was confident that he would pass. However, when he was finally ready to take the Sergeant test, he was told that he couldn’t take it because the department wanted more minorities. AA at its freaking finest! </p>
<p>It wasn’t even as if the spot came down between him and a black person with the same score on the test, and the job was given to the black person. While this would have been wrong, at least my cousin would’ve had the same chance as the minority. However, he wasn’t even allowed to take the test just because of his race! Now if that’s not racism, there’s no such thing.</p>
<p>Things like this go on all of the time in the job market. You just never hear about it because of the American government’s excessive preferential treatment towards minorities. </p>
<p>“On the other hand, if Harvard has to admit a black slam poet from the ghetto for more racial/cultural reasons rather than academic ones, just to expand the campus point-of-view from Martha's Vineyard and weekend yachting, then I say that's worth it too.”</p>
<p>I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: all white people aren’t rich! There are many more working class whites who have blue-collar jobs than affluent whites who live in mansions and have fancy cars. These working class whites are always forgotten about in the AA debate because people buy into the stereotype that that all whites are well-to-do. Many whites are just as poor as the minorities in ghettos. Nonetheless, they are at a disadvantage compared to ghetto blacks because they don’t have AA on their side. So before Harvard starts admitting blacks from the ghetto, maybe it should also consider the blue-collar whites who don’t have the money to pay their way into college as the affluent whites do.</p>
<p>What some of you guys assume is that affirmative action allows "un-qualified" minorities in. Think about it, colleges make sure they have the same percentage (give or take) of each race in entering class. How do you know that an Asian or a White wasn't let in just to make sure that there was x% of Asians or Whites at Harvard or any other competetive college this year? How do you know they didn't take the spot from a qualifeied black/hispanic? I think some people assume that "oh blacks/hispanics/native americans do worse in school." I think we need real undisputable facts before people say aa hurts asians and whites. I know many blacks/hispanics w/ 2100+ on the SAT's who get rejected by Ivies while the Ivies accept their asain/white counterparts. That's just my two cents.</p>
<p>Whether all white people are wealthy is not the point (clearly they aren't).</p>
<p>However, the majority of students attending the elite universities come from umc/affluent backgrounds.</p>
<p>An argument for AA is to help those who are disadvantaged due to past discrimination/racism (low income blacks and Hispanics - those from affluent backgrounds are no longer "disadvantaged" and arguably shouldn't have a benefit solely on the basis of their race).</p>
<p>Low income whites weren't artificially locked into a cycle of poverty due to the history of discrimination/racism in this country. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, if the elite universities really wanted a more diverse student body - they would take more low income whites in lieu of affluent whites (actually, some schools are already starting to do that - but the group that ends up getting hurt are middle-class whites).</p>
<p>As for the workplace - AA plays a slightly different role than in the college admissions process.</p>
<p>For the most part, AA in the workplace acts to ensure that qualified minority candidates aren't passed over simply due to their race/ethnicity.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What some of you guys assume is that affirmative action allows "un-qualified" minorities in.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uhmmm - there's NO assumption here - there are plenty of admissions data which show that URMs, despite having LOWER scores, have HIGHER acceptance rates.</p>
<p>In addition, when the UCal system schools were forced to drop race as a factor, the nos. of URMs, particularly at Cal and UCLA, plummetted (besides, why do you think URM groups are fighting so hard to keep AA the way it is?).</p>