Asian student filing complaint against Princeton for discrimination-WSJ article

Applying to College
301

<p>
[quote]
They have racial quotas/affirmative action to help racial groups that have traditionally faced discrimination in america (basically all non-whites), but these policies are just further discriminating against a group that has faced discrimination!! it's not equalizing, just further alienating an entire ethnic group.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd have to disagree. Quotas are illegal according to The Supreme Court. AA programs are not. And, diversity is a greater good (at least for the next 20+ years, according to the SC). As for balkanization between minority groups, you're right. When out groups do not have power, they fight amongst themselves, and believe some of the false stereotypes (like Asians being the 'model minority' or monolithic) that favor themselves. That practice shields the majority that has held power historically and currently in America by reinforcing the status quo.</p>

<p>Discrimination requires being able to set up the norms in a particular society. One can be prejudice, without having the power to act on them in societal context. Those that are racist, are prejudice AND have the ability to ACT on them in a broader context (i.e. socially, politically, economically, culturally). Thus reverse racism is a misnomer that often gets tossed about by those in the majority and some Asians to dismantle/minimize AA because it does not forward their goals or agenda to keep or gain power.</p>

<p>I agree with the alienation you speak of, but each minority group has been and continues to be marginalized, except when a non-URM needs a justification for retaining it's power or an argument to keep society subservient to the status quo. Asians are sometimes a willing participant to that end.</p>

<p>BTW, Southeast Asians are sometimes classified as URMs. Convenient that those non-URMs & Asians who speak for Asians as a group forget that, if it does not support the argument and agenda forwarded by them or their surrogates.</p>

<p>Don't forget that womyn are covered by AA as well. So, not just ethnic groups are affected.</p>

<p>Thank goodness for holistic admissions practices.</p>

302

<p>just because racial quotas are illegal doesn't mean they cant exist unofficially. ever wonder why admissions officers are so vague about what they judge applicants based on? (I'm not saying it >definitely< exists, just most likely does by a very large probability)</p>

<p>& biases against Asians are not "reverse racism"--it is outright racism. Asians have not been a group that receives preferential treatment, which is what "reverse racism" applies to. If you don't believe Asians have faced a lot of discrimination (& still do) within the US, look up Chinese Exclusion Act, Japanese Internment camps, the portrayed roles of Asians in film+tv (or lack thereof)....</p>

<p>re: Southeast Asians, like you said, are SOMETIMES classified as URMs. That means the other times, they're not.</p>

303

<p>
[quote]
just because racial quotas are illegal doesn't mean they cant exist unofficially. ever wonder why admissions officers are so vague about what they judge applicants based on? (I'm not saying it >definitely< exists, just most likely does by a very large probability)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's reaching, systematic quotas that are illegal? Conspiracy theory? As for being vague, a holistic approach utilizes as much information as possible...nothing vague there. That is why they have an application, recs, ECs, essays, grades, and tests scores (which some schools do not use). Where do you find that large probability? And, what is it based on?</p>

304

<p>
[quote]
& biases against Asians are not "reverse racism"--it is outright racism. Asians have not been a group that receives preferential treatment, which is what "reverse racism" applies to. If you don't believe Asians have faced a lot of discrimination (& still do) within the US, look up Chinese Exclusion Act, Japanese Internment camps, the portrayed roles of Asians in film+tv (or lack thereof)....

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ah. So you believe that attacking AA because it does not favor a particular minority group is unfair? How do you prove that bias against ALL Asians systematically? And, how do you account for Asians being favored in the 1970's and 80's in admissions, precisely because of their grades and test scores--because people believed that standardized tests and grades could not be biased?</p>

<p>In the UC system and elsewhere, Southeast Asians with lower test scores are admitted over East Asians and non-URMs with far lower stats and grades. Is that discrimination? </p>

<p>As for the Chinese Exclusionary Acts & Japanese internment camps, I'm intimately aware of those. I have family that were marginalized in the first case, and family members who spent time in the the latter.</p>

<p>Women did not get the right to vote until the early 20th century. There were Jim Crow laws against Blacks. Slavery. Segregation (Brown vs, Board of Education). So, again...these events are less valid than the situation faced by ALL Asians?</p>

<p>Again, that is why there is holistic admissions.</p>

305

<p>
[quote]
Southeast Asians, like you said, are SOMETIMES classified as URMs. That means the other times, they're not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That is more dependent on each college. Likewise, sometimes Latinos/as are classified as URMs and sometimes they are not. As for those who are seen as White, some are and some are not. Jewish applicants faced systematic racism for much of the 20th century. Women are sometimes considered oppressed and sometimes they are not.</p>

<p>Again, that is why holistic admissions came about, rather than relying on just tests or grades for placement. It considers more factors in an applicants background--considering gender, religion, ethnicity, socioeconomic class, social biases, and family composition, as well as ability, talent, recs, essays, leadership ability, legacy status, geographic residence, under-represented schools and school districts, et al.</p>

306

<p>
[quote]
just because racial quotas are illegal doesn't mean they cant exist unofficially. ever wonder why admissions officers are so vague about what they judge applicants based on? (I'm not saying it >definitely< exists, just most likely does by a very large probability)

[/quote]

so you think it's a big conspiracy against Asians? that's not really a convincing argument. if you consider limiting a certain ethnic groups representation using quotas then you are mistaken. colleges adhere to the idea of "adequate diversity," meaning that they try to create diverse student body within reason. </p>

<p>reasonably diverse student body:
60% White, 15% Asian, 10% Black, 10% Hispanic, 5% Other.</p>

<p>unreasonably diverse student body i.e. too many minorities.
30% White, 60% Asian, 5% Black, 5% Hispanic, > 1% Other.</p>

<p>inadequately diverse student body i.e. not enough minorities.
80% White, 5% Asian, 5% Black, 5% Hispanic, 5% Other.</p>

<p>also, i would say that top colleges are vague about their admissions policies for practical reasons (too many qualified applicants) and so that they can select whom ever they want; it's as simple as that. if you want to apply to a school that doesn't take the holistic approach, then apply to a state school.</p>

<p>
[quote]
& biases against Asians are not "reverse racism"--it is outright racism. Asians have not been a group that receives preferential treatment, which is what "reverse racism" applies to. If you don't believe Asians have faced a lot of discrimination (& still do) within the US, look up Chinese Exclusion Act, Japanese Internment camps, the portrayed roles of Asians in film+tv (or lack thereof)....

[/quote]

bias against Asians is not any type of racism, in my opinion. i think that that all colleges should make it their duty to create an adequately diverse student body, in all respects (interests, geography, race, etc.). if that means rejecting student from a particular ethnicity, who oftentimes tend to have similar applications, then so be it. people need to quit trying to "play the college admissions game." i know that it sometimes works for some people, but more often that not, kids who try to play the system get burned.</p>

307

<p>
[quote]
bias against Asians is not any type of racism

[/quote]

It sounds like you are perfectly fine with the practice, but just don't like the word.</p>

<p>Just because you don't like the R word doesn't mean it isn't true. If one student's race can help him while another's can hurt him in admissions, then the system is inherently racist. It's as simple as that. You can talk about diversity, multiculturalism and all that but realize that even those nice clean words can equate with a dirty word like racism.</p>

308

<p>
[quote]
You can talk about diversity, multiculturalism and all that but realize that even those nice clean words can equate with a dirty word like racism.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>AH Dictionary-Multiculturalism:
1. Of, relating to, or including several cultures.
2. Of or relating to a social or educational theory that encourages interest in many cultures within a society rather than in only a mainstream culture.</p>

<p>Dictionary.com-Diversity:
1. The state or fact of being diverse; difference; unlikeness.
2. Variety; multiformity.
3. A point of difference.</p>

<p>Dictionary.com-racism:
1. A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. A policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. Hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.</p>

<p>How again are they equal (or equatable)?</p>

309

<p>
[quote]
If one student's race can help him while another's can hurt him in admissions, then the system is inherently racist.

[/quote]

look up the word "racist" and see if what you said there makes any sense.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You can talk about diversity, multiculturalism and all that but realize that even those nice clean words can equate with a dirty word like racism.

[/quote]

can you explain how diversity, multiculturalism and racism are the similar?</p>

310

<p>
[quote]
Just because you don't like the R word doesn't mean it isn't true. If one student's race can help him while another's can hurt him in admissions, then the system is inherently racist.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So, by extension: </p>

<p>If one's gender can help or hinder an applicant in college admissions, is it sexist?</p>

<p>If one's EC's can help or hinder an applicant, is it discrimination?</p>

<p>If one's essays can help or hinder an applicant, is it prejudice?</p>

<p>If one's test scores can help or hinder an applicant, is it unfair?</p>

<p>If one's ability to play a sport can help or hinder and applicant, is it unjust?</p>

<p>If one's religion can help or hinder an applicant, is it biased?</p>

<p>If one's socioeconomic class can help or hinder an applicant, is it discrimination?</p>

<p>The list keeps going...</p>

<hr>

<p>So, you're saying that selective college admissions practices are inherently discriminatory and unfair by such reasoning? Amazing. Funny how that works, choosing between candidates with different backgrounds and talents, huh?! That is why a more holistic process is better than a numbers driven one--since you'd be favoring just one type of college applicant. Not perfect, but better than going back to simply a numbers driven admissions system.</p>

311

<p>The thing with EC's and test scores and essays is that they are measures of ability and performance; you are not born into a certain test score or a certain extracurricular.</p>

<p>I think religion is mostly a choice in America, but for many people around the world, it is not.</p>

<p>I suppose there is some discrimination with sports (height, weight, etc.) as well as gender.</p>

<p>The wildcard is socioeconomic class.</p>

312

<p>
[quote]
The thing with EC's and test scores and essays is that they are measures of ability and performance; you are not born into a certain test score or a certain extracurricular.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, EC's are influenced by socioeconomics, test scores are culturally biased towards the dominant group (as well as socioeconomically skewed), and the ability to write is impacted by primary and secondary education. Thus, though you are not born into a test score or EC, there are societal, communal and family pressure that do affect achievement.</p>

<p>How do you explain the closeness of SAT scores in Hawaii, which is predominantly Asian? If the Asian assertion of being more qualified is true, then why are Hawaii Asians lower scorers comparatively (to other states)? Whites out score all minority groups and the Asian sub-set in Hawaii, does that make them more deserving?</p>

<p>Here's the link: </p>

<p><a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2007/HI_07.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2007/HI_07.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

313

<p>
[quote]
I think religion is mostly a choice in America.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ask some Jewish applicants if that is a choice...so many disagree with you.</p>

314

<p>
[quote]
If one's gender can help or hinder an applicant in college admissions, is it sexist?

[/quote]
Yes

[quote]
If one's EC's can help or hinder an applicant, is it discrimination?

[/quote]

No. What kind of a strawman argument is that?

[quote]
If one's essays can help or hinder an applicant, is it prejudice?

[/quote]

same as before

[quote]
If one's test scores can help or hinder an applicant, is it unfair?

[/quote]

same as before

[quote]
If one's ability to play a sport can help or hinder and applicant, is it unjust?

[/quote]

same as before

[quote]
If one's religion can help or hinder an applicant, is it biased?

[/quote]
Absolutely

[quote]
If one's socioeconomic class can help or hinder an applicant, is it discrimination?

[/quote]
Arguably. I would argue that economic affirmative action can be justified.

[quote]
So, you're saying that selective college admissions practices are inherently discriminatory and unfair by such reasoning? Amazing.

[/quote]

No.... you said that. I never mentioned the notion that any factors outside of race aren't fair game.<br>

[quote]
Actually, EC's are influenced by socioeconomics, test scores are culturally biased towards the dominant group, and the ability to write is impacted by primary and secondary education. Thus, though you are not born into a test score or EC, there are societal, communal and family pressure that do affect achievement.

[/quote]

Race does not directly correlate to socioeconomics. Cultural bias in standardized testing is really a moot argument; I've never taken an SAT that had country club, crew, or Christmas vocabulary... have you?

[quote]
look up the word "racist" and see if what you said there makes any sense.

[/quote]

racist</a> - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race<br>
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination </p>

<p>Affirmative action would fit into the second definition. How is treating applicants differently based on race not discrimination?

[quote]
can you explain how diversity, multiculturalism and racism are the similar?

[/quote]

I didn't mean that they were similar. I said that current efforts of achieving diversity and multiculturalism, while well intended, creates a discriminatory system that treats people of different races differently.</p>

315

<p>Notice that besides ethnicity, Hawaii SAT averages are affected by parental education, citizenship, income, language acquisition, type of school attended, gender, and need for financial aid.</p>

<p>My guess would be that this pattern would be played out in a large number of states.</p>

316

<p>
[quote]
I didn't mean that they were similar. I said that current efforts of achieving diversity and multiculturalism, while well intended, creates a discriminatory system that treats people of different races differently.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The discriminatory system has been in place longer than AA policies.</p>

317

<p>this thread is over a year and a half old!</p>

318

<p>Somedum:</p>

<p>All your same as before statements are not strawmen, they follow YOUR reasoning. Any criteria in college admissions could be seen as discriminatory and unfair since it involves selectivity on the part of some schools. I don't see it that way, but you can make a case of it using YOUR reasoning and framing of the issue. </p>

<p>Racism is:
1. A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the RIGHT to RULE others.
2. A policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. Hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.</p>

<p>BTW, nice cherry picking of definition sources. </p>

<p>So you are saying that AA proponents are racist because they HATE non-URMs and some Asian groups because they assert a holistic approach to college admissions? WOW. </p>

<p>I might point out, that your assertions about not considering diversity (even as the Supreme Court recognized it as a social good) could make you racist as well, since you argue for the status quo. WOW.</p>

<p>And, the College Board stats for each state regarding SATs bear out that socioeconomic class is a factor, as is parental education, type of school, citizenship, language acquisition, et al. </p>

<p>Here's the link:</p>

<p>College-Bound</a> Seniors 2007</p>

319

<p>yes, AA is racist. Racism is when a group gets an advantage because of its race. whether or not we should have it in our colleges is a different story.</p>

320

<p>
[quote]
So you are saying that AA proponents are racist because they hate non-URMs and some Asian groups because they assert a holistic approach to college admissions? WOW.

[/quote]

That is a strawman argument in itself. I have no problem with holistic admissions. I just don't think race is fair game.

[quote]
All your same as before statements are not strawmen, they follow YOUR reasoning.

[/quote]

No you just made that up. You seem to think that people can either support a fully holistic or a fully numbers oriented game. Just because I don't support a particular factor in that holistic system does not mean I don't support a holistic system

[quote]
I might point out, that your assertions about not considering diversity (even as the Supreme Court recognized it as a social good) could make you racist as well, since you argue for the status quo. WOW.

[/quote]

Grasping at straws I see. This is really pathetic. Just because the Supreme Court (4 Justices dissented though) said in Grutter v Bollinger that race is fair game does not end the debate over whether affirmative action enabled diversity is a "social good." And how do I support the status quo? The status quo is affirmative action! You've got some nerve to call me a racist when I'm advocating for a race-blind system. Since you love the dictionary so much, why don't you use it to explain how that works?</p>