are colleges racist?

Parent Cafe
901

<p>

</p>

<p>But it is the two of you who have argued here that “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING.” Given the context of this thread, the implication of that statement is that without racial preferences, elite schools would be 50% something (read: Asian), and they wouldn’t want that, and neither would the two of you.</p>

<p>Now, if you didn’t mean that, then what was the point of saying “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING”? You just felt like throwing that out there for no reason?</p>

902

<p>You don’t see the difference between saying “elite schools don’t want to be overly anything” (epiphany and me) and “I, personally, would feel uncomfortable in an environment that is x% Asian”? (GFG)</p>

903

<p>“I live in Palos Verdes. I’d say it’s an upper middle class to upper class suburb of Los Angeles. The local high schools probably send more kids to elite schools than average. THere are probably around 10 black kids out of any graduating class of 600. Yeah, the goal has been achieved.”</p>

<p>The goals was never to get X% of African-Americans to move to Palos Verdes, CA, or any other neighborhood, but to have a society and, especially institutions that are funded, all or in part, with tax dollars to see each child according to her individual character, not as a member of a group associated with the color of her skin.</p>

904

<p>When You’re a Hammer, Everything Looks Like A Nail</p>

905

<p>

</p>

<p>We’re getting back to our fundamental disagreement on “positive” and “negative” discrimination. I don’t think you’re “wrong” to see a difference; I just disagree that fundamentally, there is one between the two.</p>

<p>And you didn’t answer my question. If you didn’t mean that, then what was the point of saying “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING”? You just felt like throwing that out there for no reason?</p>

906

<p>

</p>

<p>Poetic, but you’re still clinging on to your straw man. Even 20more did not believe that the SAT was everything, as he also referred to the SAT II, GPA, and yes…extracurriculars too.</p>

907

<p>Lol - he “also referred to the SAT Ii and GPA.” same difference. He clearly believed he was owed acceptance into at least several top 20s and that when that didn’t happen, it was discrimination against Asians. </p>

<p>yK, if people can’t figure out that no one is owed acceptance to any school and that there are simply more qualified applicants than beds, then they aren’t really all that smart. 2400 SATs notwithstanding.</p>

908

<p>“But it is the two of you who have argued here that “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING.” Given the context of this thread, the implication of that statement is that without racial preferences, elite schools would be 50% something (read: Asian), and they wouldn’t want that, and neither would the two of you.”</p>

<p>You are the one jumping from “elite schools don’t want to be 50% anything” to “because they don’t like Asians.” Elite schools like Andover and Choate and moneyed WASPs just fine but they (no longer) want to pull 50% of their class from there. You’re the one who can’t see the difference between elite schools wanting to create diverse environments and elite schools saying “Asians are undesirables so better limit them.”</p>

909

<p>

</p>

<p>So what was the point of saying that “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING”? Do you think they would be 50% Asian in the absence of racial preferences? If you don’t, then…what was the point of saying “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING”?</p>

910

<p>Beats me if they would be 50% Asian. How would I know?</p>

911

<p>“For those of you who have doubt about Stanford’s low score practice hurt Asains, see this link:” Professor 101</p>

<p>“Even 20more did not believe that the SAT was everything”… OK with me
My post quoted was not aimed at anyone in particular.</p>

912

<p>Then…what was the point of saying “the elite schools don’t want to be 50% ANYTHING”? You just felt like saying it?</p>

913

<p>

Not so easy. The main strength of the African Americans and Latinos is not themselves, but the significant percent of the others who favor policies advancing their agenda. At the grass-roots level it’s primarily because of perceived victimization of them based on their economic standing, and on the political level it’s because of support in the voting booth. Asians won’t make it in either count - if the average Joe perceives an Asian to be a doc or engineer, he’s not going to see a need for policies advancing their cause and the politician doesn’t view this voting block as significant or monolithic to pay much attention.</p>

914

<p>

</p>

<p>You obviously have a hard time interpreting what I am saying. It has nothing to do with tax dollars, and these institutions are not “fuinded with tax dollars.” These institutions compete for government grants, just like every institutiion. Hopefully, government grants are not the government “funding” private institutions, but the government contracting necessary work to institutions. If it is merely a way for the government to surreptitiously pass on tax dollars then we need to recondsider the notion of the government giving out research grants at all.</p>

<p>These schools may also also may have students who have their education partially funded by tax dollars, but I also consider that far different than tax dollars going directly into the coffers of these schools. THe students receive the grants (which are getting more and more rare) or loans. With this money they purchase a service form the insititution. It’s a business deal, and the asumption is that the univeristy is offering something of value for the money - they are not merely the beneficiary of government largesse. If I get a government backed loan to buy a house, and I use that loan to buy a house with tile floors, that is not the governemnt subsidizing the tile industry.<br>
BTW, I’m sure students at elite schools get significant financial aid from the endowment. </p>

<p>But none of this was my point anyway, assuming you are even interested in anybody else’s point. My point was to respond to a poster who implied that diversity has been achieved in this society. When I went to school 30+ years ago I left a high school where there were zero African Americians. I do not think it is a happy situaiton, nor indicative of diversity goals, that my kid today still basically goes to a high school where he could spend days on end without seeing a single African American student.</p>

<p>I also think judging people by the amount oif pigment in their skin is silly. If you believe this does still not go on, if you do not believe many people in many parts of this country still look twice when they see a mixed race couple, I think you are fooling yourself. </p>

<p>I think it is valuable for my son, as it was valuable for me, to interact with people of all different ethnicities so he can see how they are the same as him in most important ways, not how they are different. That’s why we belong to a church in Wilmington. </p>

<p>Do I think AA is the best way to do this? I don’t know, and I have agreed countless times it isn’t fair. But do I think things have changed that much around where I live. No.</p>

915

<p>

</p>

<p>You obviously have a hard time interpreting what I anm saying. It has nothing to do with tax dollars, and these institutions are not “fuinded with tax dollars.” These institutitons compete for government grants, just like every institutiion. Hopefully, government grants are not the government “funding” private institutions, but the government contracting out necessary work to institutions. If it is merely a way for the govenrment to surreptitiously pass on tax dollars then we need to reconsider the notion of the government giving out research grants at all.</p>

<p>These schools may also also may have students who have their education partially funded by tax dollars, but I also consider that far different than tax dollars going directly into the coffers of these schools. THe students receive the grants (which are getting more and more rare) or loans. With these they purchase a serice from the univeristy, which is supposedly worth the investment. It’s a business deal between student and university, with the student obtaining the funding to make the deal. THey also get a huge amount of financial aid out of the univeristy endowment. If I get a government backed loan to buy a house, and I use that loan to buy a house with tile flors, that is not the governemnt subsidizing the tile industry. </p>

<p>But that was not my point, assuming you are even interestied in anybody else’s point. My point was to respond to a poster who implied that diversity has been achieved in this society. When I went to school 30+ years ago I left a high school where there were zero African Americians. I do not think it is a happy situaiton, nor indicative of diversity goals, that my kid today still basically goes to a high school where he could spend days on end without seeing a single African American student. I also think judging people by the amount if pigment in their skin is silly. If you beleive this does still not go on, if you do not believe many people in many parts of this country still look twice when they see a mixed race couple, I think you are fooling yourself. </p>

<p>I think it is valuable for my son, as it was valuable for me, to interact with people of all different ethnicities so he can see how they are the same as him, not how they are different.</p>

<p>Do I think AA is the best way to do this? I don’t know, and I have agreed countless times it isn’t fair. But do I think things have changed that much around where I live. No.</p>

916

<p>Fabrizio, the origin of Epiphany’s “They don’t want their classes to be 60% ANYTHING” was part of a discussion in which she was REFUTING a claim that TheGFG was making. TheGFG was making a point as to why she thought adcoms might believe there’s a need to cap Asian admissions specifically (feels too “foreign”, et al). </p>

<p>Epiphany DISAGREED and said: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So. I realize we might all look the same to you, but could you PLEASE stop mixing up TheGFG’s arguments (“don’t want a campus 60% Asian because they have different foods, languages, keep to themselves, feels like a foreign country in my own land”) with the argument Epiphany was making that they don’t want their campus a majority-ANYTHING because they want to create a diverse soup?</p>

<p>Because I’m really tired of arguing this straw man with you - that the desire to ensure a diverse community (and potentially give a URM boost as part of that) is the same thing as “keeping undesirables in their place.” </p>

<p>One thing that’s very different from when I went to college is the presence of internationals (from any country). I would bet that a lot of colleges have some internal goal to have x% internationals because they believe that adds interest to their campus (and money, too, but that’s another story). Should I, as an American citizen, feel I’m being “discriminated against” because a college wants to ensure a representation of internationals?</p>

<p>But go ahead, and continue arguing that “wanting some critical mass of all different races, religions, etc.” is the exact same thing as “explicitly disliking Asians and wanting to keep them down.” Go ahead and keep comparing it to Jews in the 1920’s, even though the impetus was explicitly disliking Jews and wanting to keep them down.</p>

917

<p>

bioslick wants to make people think that the two quotations contradict each other, but they don’t. No one believes SAT is everything, but eveyone probably agrees it counts for something as top schools tend to have top scores. Stanford can use this “something” to reduce the number of Asian students.</p>

918

<p>bookmarked</p>

919

<p>“For those of you who have doubt about Stanford’s low score practice hurt Asains, see this link:” Professor 101</p>

<p>It appeared that by your statement on Stanford SAT scores, that a higher score should play a large part in acceptance (not the only thing or count for everything). Your interpretation is that the scores are lower so as to be biased against Asian. I thought it maybe due to Stanford going after the athletic scholar way more than the IVY League. </p>

<p>I’m now joining the poster that said people will believe what they want to believe. Good Luck</p>

920

<p>I wouldn’t necessarily say colleges are “racist”, but they are generally concerned about a non-white group becoming too populous/dominant and hence, are worried about the possibility of “white flight” and the likely resulting decrease in alumni donations and lowering of “prestige” (due to the racial mix).</p>

<p>Let’s face it, the whole “diversity” argument is a bunch of crock and is whatever the college admissions board/powers that be wants it to be.</p>

<p>The Ivy League and other elite private schools have a black student body disproportionately made up of black students of immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean, but they defend this by arguing “diversity.”</p>

<p>These same schools only accept Asian-American applicants w/ the highest possible scores/grades (otherwise, the AA students that are accepted wouldn’t have higher scores/grades than their white counterparts) and they are usually Asian-Am students of Chinese, Indian and Korean descent.</p>

<p>And while artificially capping the Asian-Am students nos., these same schools are chasing Asian students from Asia. But not from Cambodia, Thailand, the Philippines, etc., but from the China, India and Korea.</p>

<p>Jewish students, by far ,make up a disproportionate part of the student body at Ivy League schools.</p>

<p>The one school where the % of Jewish students lags behind is Princeton, the Ivy League school known for having the most “holistic” application process (Princeton is the one IL school where the % of Asian and Jewish students are similar).</p>

<p>People argue that Jews are just seen as whites and one can’t just separate them out.</p>

<p>I don’t know, but Jews are also seen as a distinct ethnic group and isn’t religious diversity part of the whole diversity spiel?</p>

<p>Also, schools like Vanderbilt and USC have recently actively recruited more Jewish students.</p>

<p>In case of USC, they actively recruited more Jewish students (and faculty) even tho the % of Jewish students at USC was already more than 2x the Jewish % of the US pop. - so it wasn’t like Jews were underrepresented.</p>

<p>When UCLA started their outreach program for black applicants (as a way to get around the whole race-neutral req.), the one group which saw a decline in the student body was lower-income Asian students.</p>

<p>Basically, “diversity” is whatever these schools want it to be - with the arguments changing as the desired goal changes (from group to group).</p>