<p>And no one else was?</p>
<p>K. Bye.</p>
<p>@fb0mbb there is a point to be made that racism is down(but not out) but the few loud fools(see alexisss) make it a much bigger than it need be</p>
<p>@yokis yeah I know, but I was just making a point that its ridiculous that people think racism is down when arguments like this happen daily. but i guess progress is a slow process.</p>
<p>@yo</p>
<h1>rude</h1>
<p>10 char</p>
<h1>hashtagsarefortwitter</h1>
<h1>canthelpit</h1>
<p>I read through like, 7 pages of a futile argument that has (thankfully) concluded without seeing some really important points:
- Asians once benefited from AA, mainly around the 70s and 80s. Although Asian culture, which stresses academic importance and discipline, also attributed to the rise of a more educated Asian population, we can see the effects of that benefit in today’s society.
- Although AA creates quotas (there have always been quotas, however), this creates an applicant environment in which certain races do not “steal” other races’ spots; it’s a common misconception that “that underqualified negro stole my white kid’s spot, how unfair.” That’s not true. In fact, we see the effect of removing AA in California- there has been a rise in Asian representation and a fall in representation in other races, including white.
- And my next point- competition within the Asian applicant pool itself is a huge factor of to why many applicants who seem qualified by most people don’t get in. Also, it takes more than perfect numbers to get into top tier schools. It’s a holistic process for a reason. If Asian Applicant X has a 2400 and Black Applicant Y has a 1950, Y might get in because Y can contribute more socioeconomic and intellectual diversity. Y might have lots of research experience and is premed; Y might be one of its kind in that year’s applicant pool. Admissions are not black and white, and therefore, statistics often are rendered useless.
- The purpose of higher education is to, well, get an education. If we limit high-quality education to the “elite” of the population - the legacies, the private school kids, the smartest of the smartest, even if they worked their damndest to get there - there leaves a huge majority of people of all races who do not get access to that education. The goal is to help along races who are already behind. Think of each race as at a starting line, about to run. Many minorities are far away from the starting line due to the past. AA helps those disadvantaged to get to the starting line. The goal is that once we get these races caught up (and they are behind, make no mistake), we won’t need AA anymore. That will be an awesome day.
- Take away affirmative action so that we all fairly compete together? Yes, sure! But first, lets make all the schools equal. Which they are not. Lets fix educational disparities first.
- Racism isn’t dead. Come on now.
- Many minorities are still underrepresented at elite universities. I find it strange when people complain about “the underqualified” getting into lets say, Harvard, when African Americans are still a mere 7% of the Harvard student body. My, AA is awfully ineffective to be so unfair.
- Colleges can spot kids who are depending on AA from a mile away. Trust me. I have been told this in interviews with top schools. Colleges really do look at kids and ask “But can they contribute to the class of 20XX? How will they?” If AA got in kids “just because they’re a certain race” I assure you, they would be in higher representation and coming out in higher applicant numbers.</p>
<p>Just throwing some points out there to give you guys something to think about and take with you when a peaceful and intellectual debate arises in your day-to-day lives. Not trying to re-spark things. And it’s pretty obvious when nothing you say will change someone’s mind, the same way many of you will remain steadfast when others try to convince you that AA is unfair. Opinions are dangerous like that- you can’t always prove them right or wrong. I really love discussing this topic. Also, remember that AA is not perfect, so there will be some points that are legitimate that go against the defense of AA. It’s a good point that AA should give a stronger focus on socioeconomic status than it already does, but need-blind admissions can stand in the way of this.</p>
<p>Also, Asian is not just Chinese and Japanese. There are some seriously disadvantaged Asian populations (including Vietnamese, immigrant children, children in non-English-speaking homes, ect) who have to compete with other extremely “qualified” Asians. Opportunities to point these situations out sometimes arise in essay prompts, but not always.</p>
<p>Sorry this is long as hell.</p>
<p>Am I the only one that thinks its best to get my decision by snail mail? Or should I have a change of heart lol</p>
<p>^Change of heart. </p>
<p>Unless you have a milkman and paperboy also, there’s no need to wait for the daily mailman.</p>
<p>I agree with many of the points made by BEYONCEBETWICE. I defintely appreciate you pointing out the diverse population of ‘Asians’ - all of which are NOT privileged. Bottom of line, it is of my opinion that often time we put too much emphasis on one aspect of an applicant - the ACT or SAT score. If that is all that was required for selecting a student, the applicantion process was consist of your name and a score! However, as we all know, the application process does involve many other aspects in order to generate a total picture of each individual applicant.</p>
<p>I post all these arguments. But no credit for me.</p>
<p>@philovitist, this thread is over 15 pages long. If you posted all of these points, I’m sorry. I just didn’t see them. Not that any of us need credit for presenting common sense, though. I just see a serious absence of these points in a lot of (peaceful and practical) arguments, which are plentiful here on CC and probably rarely ever change anyone’s mind.</p>
<p>I haven’t bothered to read through the entire thread, but I did read this par and thought I should point something out. Everyone knows that AA extends beyond college, and goes into the workplace, right?
White women have benefited the most from AA more than any other group.</p>
<p>^ I actually mentioned that.</p>
<p>No one cares apparently. -__-</p>
<p>Any way the wind blows…</p>
<p>The definition of AA after college shifts to suit the desires of the employer. Every employer will have a convenient definition with which they comply or even excel at. My experience is that few companies are good at diversity. Part of it is functional. Really good computer geeks tend to be of a type, petroleum engineers are a type, etc. another part is supply. The pipeline of candidates needs to be diverse. Another part is culture. Some cultures are exclusive but not racist or sexist. Other cultures are exclusive and are racist or sexist. Knowing the difference is wisdom.</p>
<p>LOL this has become such an unnecessarily heated discussion. Gratuitous hatred much?</p>
<p>Reality is that whether affirmative action may seem justifiable or not it still takes place in college applications and will probably continue to take part in college apps for at least another generation.</p>
<p>No one should blame others for not getting into college–the application process itself is a crapshoot (I know someone who was admitted to Stanford/Yale but was rejected to UCLA). Also, those who got in aren’t simply “lucky” but have actually worked hard to get into where they currently stand (<em>gasp</em> omg I would have never guessed).</p>
<p>There is no perfect system that will appease every single person. There are many problems within the application process as it is: SAT’s and ACT’s don’t necessarily reflect a person’s intellectual capacity, some Asian Americans may complain about “reverse-discrimination” regarding test scores (“what’s the purpose of standardized scores if they’re not looked at objectively?”) , and we all know that being from an economically/financially sound background usually means accessibility to resources (e.g. super-motivated parents, volunteering at dad’s hospital, college-obsessed moms …). </p>
<p>But what people often forget is that 1) hard-working individuals will always find success in life, and 2) colleges do NOT DEFINE your life. You are in control. So instead of pushing the blame onto others it’s important to work with what you have, find the resources you need, and try your best and grab at every given opportunity. This leads to success–not your racial status or ethnicity.</p>
<p>This is coming from an Asian American student living with his grandmother and 8th-grade brother.</p>
<p>EDIT: Oh, and life is unfair. It took me too long to comprehend this. The reason for posting this is more of a rebellion to the statement than anything else. Don’t mistakenly identify me as advocating the Republican ideology of the “self-made man” please. I just feel that… in a sense AA has its merits, but I wish other similar systems existed in different aspects of our lives to help make me feel a little better (selfish much? LOL…). Sometimes I feel like I’m being overly pessimistic, and while being realistic is necessary in life a pinch of optimism won’t hurt.
I would also like to point out that oftentimes the truly successful has often experienced true hardships.</p>
<p>why all these qualifiers? I don’t think there are absolutes in this debate and without them I’m afraid I might sound too extremist.</p>
<p>If I may add this to the discussion: the oft-heard “a URM took the spot of the ORM” simply doesn’t hold water. Like others have said, many colleges have goals (or the hated word: “quotas”) for sub groups. If big-name college X has a goal to have 8% African Americans in its incoming freshman class, then those who aren’t AA were never privy to those “set aside” slots. This is called “cateory admissions”. For a full discussion read this:</p>
<p>[Reed</a> College Messages essay](<a href=“http://www.reed.edu/apply/news_and_articles/admission_messages.html]Reed”>http://www.reed.edu/apply/news_and_articles/admission_messages.html)</p>
<p>Basically it means that a high performing African American applicant, if accepted, keeps out a less high performing African American. Those slots were never even available to the Asian American or caucasian kid. Just like if a school allows 6 recruits for the Ice Hockey team and 8 apply for them. The school will take the top six – not just the 4 with the best scores and free up the slots for some math whiz kid. That math whiz kid NEVER was in line for any of those six slots. Doesn’t happen.</p>
<p>^ That’s a concept so many struggle to understand.</p>
<p>It’s kind of irrelevant though. Anit-AA people feel that those spots should not be reserved for a certain group of people in the sake of “diversity”. </p>
<p>The only reason eff with AA as it is is because I’m black tbr.</p>