Asian student filing complaint against Princeton for discrimination-WSJ article

Applying to College
341

<p>Narcissa:

[quote]
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.

[/quote]

wow. that's not even close to what racism is... racism has absolutely nothing to do with being advantaged or disadvantaged; it's strictly about one race believing they are superior to another race. historically, it was that kind of thinking that led to the mistreatment of various minority groups. i'm not sure how you can argue that racism is logic behind AA... perhaps if you think it is addressing past discrimination justified by racism but even that isn't necessarily true nowadays.</p>

<p>
[quote]
yeah, AA is also sexist, if schools actively try to recruit females. like MIT. i don't get your point.

[/quote]

your understanding of Affirmative Action, racism, and sexism seem to be inadequate. Affirmative Action is practiced on a case by case basis. at schools where there are too many females, males are given preference. at schools where there too few females, like MIT, females will be given preference. if AA weren't applied on a case by case basis and simply always favored females, then maybe it would be "sexist."</p>

<p>somedumbnoob:

[quote]
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]

well i would consider you racist if the only factor you didn't support was race. you might as well be saying that you don't want to go to school with certain ethnicities.</p>

<p>you say that the reason why you don't support race being considered is because it's irrelevant. however, you fail to realize that so are ECs, essays, etc. the only thing that is actually relevant to colleges is whether or not you are qualified. hence, the admissions systemthat you are advocating, one that only considers relevant things, is one that would consider only grades and test scores.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Slavery also cannot hate in and of itself. I guess since AA can't be sexist, slavery can't be racist! What are you saying here? Of course a system has no human emotions.

[/quote]

this is sort of stupid and distracting. AA is not sexist or racist because the justifications behind it and the way that it is used have nothing to do with sexism or racism.</p>

<p>
[quote]
EVERYTHING should be up for debate ALL the time.

[/quote]

i would have to agree that people should remain to question certain policies but Affirmative Action isn't one of them. if certain people actually understood Affirmative Action's role today and how little it influences college admissions, i think they would no longer be flipping out about it. it merely gives schools the right to actively create a racially diverse student body.</p>

<p>i still do not understand any of the anti-Affirmative Action arguments. how can you argue that diversity is not a social good? that's a pretty hard case to make.</p>

342

<p>
[quote]
^^ u remind me of this kid at my school who likes to argue just for argument's sake. another trait of him is that he never actually believed in any of the things he argued for; he actually sided with the majority the whole time.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So I remind you of this kid, who believes in the non-URM, male status quo? After you asserted that: </p>

<p>
[quote]
somedumbnoob, I completely agree with you on that one. It's the whole point of freedom of speech & expression. Without debate+discussion, we'd all be sheep.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Somed was addressing discussion and debate...and he does address it by saying everything should be debatable, even as he implied that I'm against it...</p>

343

<p>
[quote]
he does address it by saying everything should be debatable, even as he implied that I'm against it...

[/quote]

I was just saying that there is nothing in past or present government policies that shouldn't be debatable... a response to you suggesting that since the SC supported AA, I should too.

[quote]
well i would consider you racist if the only factor you didn't support was race. you might as well be saying that you don't want to go to school with certain ethnicities.

[/quote]

I'd have to postpone my retirement from this thread for one more post because I seriously take offense to that. I've gone to school in 8 very demographically distinct districts and there is no racial group that I wouldn't want in my class. All I'm saying is that natural diversity is fine.... affirmative action diversity isn't because, for every person it benefits, it is unfair to somebody else.<br>

[quote]
you say that the reason why you don't support race being considered is because it's irrelevant. however, you fail to realize that so are ECs, essays, etc. the only thing that is actually relevant to colleges is whether or not you are qualified. hence, the admissions systemthat you are advocating, one that only considers relevant things, is one that would consider only grades and test scores.

[/quote]

no... ECs and essays actually prove or disprove your qualifications. Race does not.

[quote]
AA is not sexist or racist because the justifications behind it and the way that it is used have nothing to do with sexism or racism.

[/quote]

ugh. Whatever, I'm tired of this. People like Narcissa and I see it differently. If you don't, fine.

[quote]
i would have to agree that people should remain to question certain policies but Affirmative Action isn't one of them.

[/quote]

Not exactly my idea of a perfect system but whatever is your cup of tea...I'm through here.</p>

344

<p>
[quote]
I actually don't know what you were trying to say with that one. How does that relate to race?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You asserted that:

[quote]
Race does not directly correlate to socioeconomics.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Test scores do tend to correlate with ethnicity, race, income level, parent's education, gender, language acquisition, citizenship, HS type, et al. I gave you the link to the College Board with respect to all 50 states. So that you could see how some of those characteristics disproportionately affect non-Whites and how they affect test scores.</p>

<p>Just wanted to address the socioeconomic realities. By-the-way, I agree that poor, rural white applicants should be considered socioeconomic AA admits.</p>

345

<p>
[quote]
I was just saying that there is nothing in past or present government policies that shouldn't be debatable... a response to you suggesting that since the SC supported AA, I should too.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I said, for me, the debate was over, with respect to diversity being a social good. Perhaps, I wasn't being clear?</p>

346

<p>
[quote]
All I'm saying is that natural diversity is fine.... affirmative action diversity isn't because, for every person it benefits, it is unfair to somebody else.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Natural diversity tends to not happen because the majority tends to set the norms--defining the status quo. Thus, if non-URMs wanted to enact laws against, say Blacks (i.e. Jim Crow), who would be oppressed?</p>

<p>The problem is that socioeconomic diversity, gender diversity, et al. would be then suspect as well. Check SAT scores and see how school type, parental education, and income affect test performance, at least. It would mean that affluent, non-URMs, who do not attend public schools, and who have parents with advanced degrees, would be the norm.</p>

347

<p>
[quote]
no... ECs and essays actually prove or disprove your qualifications. Race does not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Race/ethnicity is a mitigating factor when it comes to access to educational opportunities and extracurricular activities. Just as socioeconomic class, gender (see SAT test scores), special talent, legacy status, geographic residence, et al.</p>

348

<p>
[quote]
I'd have to postpone my retirement from this thread for one more post because I seriously take offense to that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Some minorities feel that ignoring their ethnicity, you ignore a part of the said individual, because it can minimize the issues faced while growing up as a minority. It is even more acute, if the URM applicant outwardly does not fit the status quo or norm--again, defined by the non-URM majority.</p>

<p>Thus, by choosing just race/ethnicity, you are in effect making them somewhat less than complete. Some would argue that it can be marginalizing. I don't think that is your intent, but it can be taken that way.</p>

<p>So, race-blind policies can initiate a practice that does not recognize diversity or multiculturalism, but rather the norm or status quo.</p>

349

<p>Newjack: the difference is that ECs, essays, etc. are a measure of competence. A leadership position in a significant EC could at least demonstrate charisma or communication ability (unquestionably a useful trait to bring to, say, negotiations classes at a business school or discussions in a politics seminar.) A well-crafted essay demonstrates writing fluency, which is surely useful in the classroom!</p>

<p>Race, gender, etc. are circumstances of birth. How any of these things are innately correlated with ability to succeed at college is beyond me.</p>

<p>Yeah, one could argue that ECs, essays, etc. can be "faked" through coaching and opportunities available only to the upper class. This is why I (and others) don't disagree with socioeconomic AA to an extent. </p>

<p>As for how large a role AA plays in the admissions process, I found an interesting article last night (apparently a summary of a longer book):
ALER</a> -- Sign In Page</p>

<p>"Substantial differences exist between the records of black and white admittees; black matriculants perform noticeably worse than white matriculants, even when adjusting for the weaker initial credentials of black matriculants..."</p>

<p>The article notes that AA apparently plays a far larger role in the admissions process than factors such as legacy. The author's conclusion is ultimately pro-AA (the final section is entirely opinion-based), but I'll put up the link anyway as I think the hard data in the opening sections speaks for itself.</p>

<p>(Edit: Er, apparently one needs a subscription to access the journal. If any of you are interested in seeing the numbers that back up the claims above, let me know and I'll post them here...)</p>

350

<p>Can you post? Does it include Asians and Latinos/as?</p>

351

<p>
[quote]
I'd have to postpone my retirement from this thread for one more post because I seriously take offense to that. I've gone to school in 8 very demographically distinct districts and there is no racial group that I wouldn't want in my class. All I'm saying is that natural diversity is fine.... affirmative action diversity isn't because, for every person it benefits, it is unfair to somebody else.

[/quote]

how are college admissions fair if one person gets in when another person, with similar qualifications, doesn't? </p>

<p>also, the reason why the Supreme Court ruled that seeking racial diversity is a legitimate goals is actually because it could not happen naturally. i mean after hundreds of years of slavery, discrimination, etc. do you think some law that said it was illegal to discrimate on the basis of color would fix everything? if you do that's very idealistic of you but it is out of touch with reality. (dude, the whole thing about all men being created equally didn't even prevent slavery from happening...) even when the Supreme Court mandated busing, schools hardly became anymore diverse than they were before (white people just fled to the suburbs). all of this seems to contradict your statement that "diversity naturally occurs."</p>

<p>
[quote]
no... ECs and essays actually prove or disprove your qualifications. Race does not.

[/quote]

so because i was president of NHS that proves that i can handle a school's curriculum? compared to test scores and grades, ECs and essays provide little insight into whether or not an applicant is qualified.</p>

<p>
[quote]
ugh. Whatever, I'm tired of this. People like Narcissa and I see it differently. If you don't, fine.

[/quote]

well you see it the wrong way. you guys aren't even using the defintion of words correctly... if someone told you that 2 + 2 didn't equal 4, would you think, "maybe that person doesn't see it the way i do," or, "maybe that person has no idea what he or she is talking about and should probably stop making a fool of themselves?" i would bet you would think the second.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Not exactly my idea of a perfect system but whatever is your cup of tea...I'm through here.

[/quote]

well it's not about you; it's about the common good.</p>

<p>
[quote]
the difference is that ECs, essays, etc. are a measure of competence. A leadership position in a significant EC could at least demonstrate charisma or communication ability (unquestionably a useful trait to bring to, say, negotiations classes at a business school or discussions in a politics seminar.) A well-crafted essay demonstrates writing fluency, which is surely useful in the classroom!

[/quote]

still, this can be better measured from looking at an applicant's grades and test scores.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Race, gender, etc. are circumstances of birth. How any of these things are innately correlated with ability to succeed at college is beyond me.

[/quote]

it's beyond me too. it really should not be that way but it is.</p>

<p>anyways, this is more an argument as to whether or not AA should have been created in the first place. if you want to argue about whether or not it should still exist then you should be arguing about the merits of racial diversity and whether or not it is a social good.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"Substantial differences exist between the records of black and white admittees; black matriculants perform noticeably worse than white matriculants, even when adjusting for the weaker initial credentials of black matriculants..."

[/quote]

well this depends on the schools we are talking about. at schools like Harvard/Princeton/etc. African Americans do just fine.</p>

352

<p>Ah, AA again! Think about this, 40 years AA in practice, if URM stays URM, you have to ask, do they really have the desire or something needed to rise above the URM? </p>

<p>From Li's back ground and cultural upbring, it took tremondouse courage to file this complain. I remember read somewher he came to US at age of 4? If so, he is a first generation of Asia America, with his achivement, should this count some thing? His parents also first generation immigrants from china were among those come to US with no more than couple of hundreds $ in pocket. Years after, this family were able to afford living in an affluence area it says something (work ethics, intelectual, etc.) about this Asia family. ... IMO, this is all about American Dreams. Or may be the 'American Dream' only runs in first generation? The longer you live here, the more you know the system, you know there is always something or someone could rely on, and you can always get some slack cut off for you. ... It is about time to think hard how to practice AA.</p>

353

<p>
[quote]
Ah, AA again! Think about this, 40 years AA in practice, if URM stays URM, you have to ask, do they really have the desire or something needed to rise above the URM?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I guess that's the reason women don't make as much as men for the same jobs too--especially since they have benefited from AA? Guess it's their fault.</p>

<p>Does that mean that rural, poor White applicants, who benefit from "socioeconomic AA" don't have the desire?</p>

<p>Or, does the Southeast Asian student at a UC school not want to get ahead?</p>

<p>The status quo will argue that, to be sure. That is thankfully why schools use holistic admissions policies. And, it is funny that those who have traditionally benefited from being affluent, non-URM, private schools students with parents who have advanced college degrees argue about fairness. When it is an advantage to be the norm by which others are judged in society. Or, a group by which they can hide behind, while reinforcing the false 'model minority' moniker.</p>

<p>It's the height of irony.</p>

354

<p>
[quote]
Or may be the 'American Dream' only runs in first generation? The longer you live here, the more you know the system, you know there is always something or someone could rely on, and you can always get some slack cut off for you. ... It is about time to think hard how to practice AA.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Li's family had a choice as to where they would emigrate to. I hope you're not suggesting that African slaves had that choice. </p>

<p>Or, that Native Americans could simply have turned back the early white settlers in America, if they wanted to. </p>

<p>Or, that Jim Crow laws were not implemented by the majority against Blacks, and that they were fine with that.</p>

<p>Or, that women were unable to vote until the beginning of the 20th century because they somehow were fine with their lot until then.</p>

355

<p>
[quote]
Ah, AA again! Think about this, 40 years AA in practice, if URM stays URM, you have to ask, do they really have the desire or something needed to rise above the URM?

[/quote]

i would like to point out that achieveing success is and has been much easier for immigrant minorities. because a majority of these immigrants came after the Civil Rights Movement, they would not have been exposed to or knowledgeable of the racism and prejudice that minorities who had been living in this country for generations experienced. this gave them a huge advantage, psychologically: just look at the large amounts of first generation Asian and African kids getting into top colleges. (not sure if this is true, but i heard that first generation Asians take spots away from Asian-Am. kids. even if this isn't true, it is no doubt the first generation Asians who are driving up the admissions standards for Asians. same is true for Africans and African Americans.)</p>

<p>
[quote]
It is about time to think hard about AA.

[/quote]

i don't think we're quite there yet. i have a feeling that, as long as no racists are given power, seeking racial diversity will always be a legitimate goal.</p>

<p>
[quote]
From Li's back ground and cultural upbring, it took tremondouse courage to file this complain.

[/quote]

courage? i think it took nerve for him to file it... talk about some one not being satisfied with the opportunities given to them. for some one with his background, i would say that he is acting disgracefully. i really hate to see when people, including myself, fail to see how much worse things can be...</p>

<p>IsleBoy:
just want to say thanks for contributing to these AA threads.</p>

356

<p>You know, I used to work in NYC, where a lot of asia american works as IT stufs. When market is down, company has to cut off the head count. In same group usually the Asian are the first let go no matter how good the technical skill this asia is superior than his black countparter in the same group. Because the management team is so afraid of the AA law suite filed by black people against the company. By stereotype on street, asian rarely cause this kind of 'trouble'. And you rarealy heard the law sute or complain filed by those laid off Asian. There are a lot of reasons that they don't want to bother with law sute or complain, one of them is they don't like confrontation. And they feel if he/himself can't benifit, then why bother.</p>

357

<p>
[quote]
You know, I used to work in NYC, where a lot of asia american works as IT stufs. When market is down, company has to cut off the head count. In same group usually the Asian are the first let go no matter how good the technical skill this asia is superior than his black countparter in the same group. Because the management team is so afraid of the AA law suite filed by black people against the company. By stereotype on street, asian rarely cause this kind of 'trouble'. And you rarealy heard the law sute or complain filed by those laid off Asian. There are a lot of reasons that they don't want to bother with law sute or complain, one of them is they don't like confrontation. And they feel if he/himself can't benifit, then why bother.

[/quote]

well i would think that you of all people would also agree with the fact that an African American looking for an IT job would have a much more difficult time just getting an interview than an Asian would. there was a study done that showed that a person with a "black sounding" name was less likely to get an interview than a person with a "white sounding" name even when the person with the "black sounding" name was more qualified.</p>

<p>not to rely on stereotypes, but i would bet that the Asian would have a much easier time being hired for an IT job simply because "Asian people are good with technology/computers/science/etc."</p>

<p>
[quote]
In same group usually the Asian are the first let go no matter how good the technical skill this asia is superior than his black countparter in the same group.

[/quote]

i would bet that your company is afraid to fire or not promote females too, though. so let's not just target "black" people here... plus i bet there has been a case where a more qualified Asian was let go while a lesser qualified Asian was allowed to stay.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Because the management team is so afraid of the AA law suite filed by black people against the company.

[/quote]

hell yea! bettah recognize! lol... jk. :P</p>

<p>also, i'm not really sure if this matter has to do with Affirmative Action since you're not talking about hiring workers. i think it has more to do with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.</p>

<p>
[quote]
In 1964 Congress passed Public Law 82-352 (78 Stat. 241). The provisions of this civil rights act forbade discrimination on the basis of sex as well as race in hiring, promoting, and firing.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
And you rarealy heard the law sute or complain filed by those laid off Asian. There are a lot of reasons that they don't want to bother with law sute or complain, one of them is they don't like confrontation. And they feel if he/himself can't benifit, then why bother.

[/quote]

well that's their problem. just because a couple of Asian people are too shy to say how they really feel doesn't mean we should get rid of Civil Rights Act of 1964.</p>

358

<p>IsleBoy,</p>

<p>Do you even know what status quo means, or do you just like the term?</p>

<p>Is it not true that under the current state of affairs, affirmative action is widely practiced? Is it not true that only a handful of states have passed initiatives banning both discrimination and preferential treatment?</p>

<p>Since both statements are true, affirmative action is the status quo. You support affirmative action, therefore you support the status quo.</p>

359

<p>
[quote]

compared to test scores and grades, ECs and essays provide little insight into whether or not an applicant is qualified.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, isn't this a pretty strong endorsement of "numbers only" admissions?</p>

<p>For the record, I'm against "numbers only."</p>

360

<p>
[quote]
Do you even know what status quo means, or do you just like the term?</p>

<p>Is it not true that under the current state of affairs, affirmative action is widely practiced? Is it not true that only a handful of states have passed initiatives banning both discrimination and preferential treatment?</p>

<p>Since both statements are true, affirmative action is the status quo. You support affirmative action, therefore you support the status quo.

[/quote]

i'm guessing that we have all come the conclusion the IsleBoy is right? yay for tolerance and understanding! :)</p>

<p>EDIT:

[quote]
Uh, isn't this a pretty strong endorsement of "numbers only" admissions?</p>

<p>For the record, I'm against "numbers only."

[/quote]

not really. read the exchange to understand the context.</p>