Beyond Race in Affirmative Action- New Supreme Court Case

[ohiobassmom]

<p>A good read.</p>

<p>

if entrance to higher education in America were only based on test scores and academic ability, the biggest losers, by far, would be wealthy white kids.

</p>

<p>[Affirmative</a> action and the real enemy of education equality | Gary Younge | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk](<a href=“Affirmative action and the real enemy of education equality | Gary Younge | The Guardian”>Affirmative action and the real enemy of education equality | Gary Younge | The Guardian)</p>

[MaxineShaw]

<p>

My question is: do you believe favoritism toward minorities in university admissions is justified because in other parts of life (e.g., treatment by justice system, getting loans, etc.) they are disadvantaged?

</p>

<p>First of all, define “favoritism.” To you, it seems to mean “some URM getting a break for a change, as opposed to all the other breaks non-URMs get.” Maybe that’s not how you meant it, but “favoritism” largely suggests that somebody who is unqualified is catching a break - and this is the main problem. </p>

<p>Second, I seem to recall admissions being done on some sort of point-based scale. Jamal may have a 3.59 GPA and an 1180 SAT and get an additional 50 points because he’s black. I think that’s fine. Just like I think it’s fair to give 50 points to a student with a lower GPA that may have had a job during high school (working is just as much a student activity as Student Council), or to a female applicant in a field where women are underrepresented, such as engineering, or to a student from Appalachia. </p>

<p>If Jamal only got in because he was black, he’s going to wash out anyway, and if he got in and makes it to the end, he was obviously qualified. Good for him. White America has had some 400-500 years to work on this diversity thing, and it never seems to work until policies and laws set in, meaning - gasp! - that some white people are going to get denied. </p>

<p>As for socioeconomics, there is hardly some large amount of middle-class black kids and Latino kids pushing poor whites out of college, so the “what about the Obama kids?” argument is downright silly. Heck, even white people won’t put that myth forward. That’s how silly it is.</p>

<p>If so many unqualified students of color are getting into college, why are the rates of URM in college so low? Whites/Asians are still by and large the majority of collegegoers, so what in the world are you complaining about? There are plenty of blacks who don’t get into their top colleges, either - I was waitlisted (eventually accepted) for my top school, and it was the best thing that ever happened to me. Same thing with being originally rejected from the school where I am now. I accepted that, went to JUCO, busted my butt and came back to scholarships offers just one semester later. It happens. Suck it up and drive on. </p>

<p>When UT can get a black/Latino black rate higher than 25% (with AA, no less!), then I’ll take that argument seriously. Until then, we need to see some concrete proof that AA is actually doing damage to white students, rather than denying them something they were never entitled to in the first place. This isn’t even about equality. This about whining white people wanting to take their unearned privilege back.</p>

[tk21769]

<p>At any selective university in America, public or private, the number of AA admits who benefit from preferential consideration of SATs is probably no greater than a few percent of the class. And it’s not as if those students have no compensating qualifications … or that post-graduate outcomes don’t demonstrate the pay-off from taking a chance on these kids. </p>

<p>“Holistic”, preferential consideration of grades and scores is given to far greater numbers of white students. I don’t expect we’ll ever make a Supreme Court case out of that.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

As for socioeconomics, there is hardly some large amount of middle-class black kids and Latino kids pushing poor whites out of college, so the “what about the Obama kids?” argument is downright silly. Heck, even white people won’t put that myth forward. That’s how silly it is.

</p>

<p>If it’s that silly of an argument, then you could institute socioeconomic AA only and get the same racial breakdown of colleges. Again, if you really believe this, then you must believe that socioeconomic AA would be just as effective as racial AA in maintaining minority numbers at any given college.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

A good read.</p>

<p>Quote:
if entrance to higher education in America were only based on test scores and academic ability, the biggest losers, by far, would be wealthy white kids. </p>

<p>Affirmative action and the real enemy of education equality | Gary Younge | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

</p>

<p>That’s fine by me if the wealthy white kids lose out if they aren’t academically as capable or accomplished. Personally, I’m not sure if the numbers of whites went up after Berkeley stopped implementing racial AA; I know the number of Asians increased.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

First of all, define “favoritism.” To you, it seems to mean “some URM getting a break for a change, as opposed to all the other breaks non-URMs get.” Maybe that’s not how you meant it, but “favoritism” largely suggests that somebody who is unqualified is catching a break - and this is the main problem.

</p>

<p>All I meant by “favoritism in admissions” was that the minority status of an applicant would boost their chances at admissions. That’s the definition of racial AA. I didn’t mean any of the connotations that the word “favoritism” may have.</p>

[MaxineShaw]

<p>Also from The Guardian:
[A</a> supreme showdown | World news | The Guardian](<a href=“http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jun/21/usa.internationaleducationnews]A”>A supreme showdown | US news | The Guardian)</p>

<p>It does an excellent job breaking down the points-based system AA is based on, and pretty much explains why “some black kid took my spot” was all but mathematically impossible in the Gratz case:</p>

<p>

In 2002, 25,081 students applied for just 5,186 places. Whichever way you cut it, around 20,000 people are going to be disappointed. The question for the university is not whether or not it takes applicants who are qualified, but which qualified applicants it wants to take. “It’s an issue of maths,” says Julie Peterson, a spokesperson for the university. “There is no way that all of the students qualified to come here are going to come here. No matter what system you use, there are going to be some students who feel, ‘That’s not fair.’”</p>

<p>Herein lies the central problem with Gratz’s allegation that she was rejected because she is white. The number of African-American, native American and Hispanic students who apply to the university is very small, so they have only a negligible effect on the odds of white students being accepted. Take 1995, the year Gratz was turned down: minorities comprised just 11% of the applicants. Even if all of them had been rejected, the percentage of white students accepted would have risen only from 25% to 30%.</p>

<p>The truth, says the university, is that Gratz would not have got in, anyway - not because she is white or because she was not smart, but because, given the stiff competition, she was simply not smart enough. “People don’t get in for a lot of reasons,” says Peterson. “It’s a myth to say, ‘But for that minority student, I would have got in.’ It’s mathematically ridiculous. Race is a very emotional subject in our country. People have very strong feelings about it, and they are not always grounded in fact.”

</p>

<p>

I didn’t mean any of the connotations that the word “favoritism” may have.

</p>

<p>Then I would suggest you use a less loaded term. </p>

<p>

If it’s that silly of an argument, then you could institute socioeconomic AA only and get the same racial breakdown of colleges. Again, if you really believe this, then you must believe that socioeconomic AA would be just as effective as racial AA in maintaining minority numbers at any given college.

</p>

<p>I wouldn’t have a problem with it at all, if it will make white people feel better. Why? Because barring AA by race but granting it will change little, if anything. In fact, squeezing out minority students by admitting poor whites will eventually bring the HBCU system back to its former glory - and if our Latino brothers and sisters decide to go to HBCUs, even better.</p>

<p>

[Although</a> HBCUs only account for 3 percent of the nations’ colleges, they graduate over 50 percent of Black professionals. According to I’ll Find a Way or Make One by Juan Williams and Dwayne Ashley, Florida A&M University has outranked Harvard University in the number of National Achievement scholars it’s enrolled. Tuskegee University graduates 80 percent of blacks who practice veterinary medicine, while Xavier University places more blacks into medical school than any other college in the U.S. Moreover, 50 percent of black women with science doctorates are alumnae of Bennett or Spelman Colleges. Arkansas Baptist College has a 100 percent graduation rate; Spelman follows at 81 percent, then Howard University at 69 percent. Higher graduation and lower dropout rates prove HBCUs are experts at educating black people.](<a href=“http://bellemagazineonline.com/the-benefits-of-hbcus/]Although”>http://bellemagazineonline.com/the-benefits-of-hbcus/)

</p>

<p>Best of all, petulant white students will no longer have an excuse when they still don’t get into the schools of their choice. A win-win situation all around. Bar AA period, for all I care. It’s not going to have the effect that so many of these “good Americans” think it’s going to have.</p>

[Dad_of_3]

<p>One source with good stats on admission by scores and GPA is for med school admission. These are grids for AA, Asians, and Whites showing the acceptance rate based on GPA and MCAT scores:
<a href=“https://www.aamc.org/download/157594/data/table25-b-mcatgpa-grid-black.pdf[/url]”>https://www.aamc.org/download/157594/data/table25-b-mcatgpa-grid-black.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“https://www.aamc.org/download/157948/data/table25-h-mcatgpa-grid-hisp.pdf[/url]”>https://www.aamc.org/download/157948/data/table25-h-mcatgpa-grid-hisp.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“https://www.aamc.org/download/157958/data/table25-mcatgpa-grid-white-0911.pdf[/url]”>https://www.aamc.org/download/157958/data/table25-mcatgpa-grid-white-0911.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“https://www.aamc.org/download/157598/data/table25-a-mcatgpa-grid-asian.pdf[/url]”>https://www.aamc.org/download/157598/data/table25-a-mcatgpa-grid-asian.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Let’s say you look at overall admission rates for a particular MCAT score - 27 to 29.
For Asians, the chance of getting into an MD program is 34.5%, for whites, it is 43.6%, for Hispanics, it’s 65.1%, and for AA, 79.4%.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>^ I can see why that would be relevant to many. Relevant to others though, assuming each graduating student would make a good enough physician, would be the actual number of each group, attending, graduating and in the workplace. Is that on there somewhere?</p>

<p>I can see the number applying, total accepted, and I can see the acceptance rates. </p>

<p>Looks like blacks have the lowest acceptance rates, whites and Hispanics the highest. So individually, blacks might have the highest chance, but as an overall group, the lowest. Am I getting that right?</p>

<p>Again, I get why not everybody would care about that figure, or find it relevant to this discussion.</p>

[ohiobassmom]

<p>I looked at those #s too Shrinkwrap. It’s another way of looking at the same data and certainly has some relevance.</p>

[MaxineShaw]

<p>

Let’s say you look at overall admission rates for a particular MCAT score - 27 to 29.
For Asians, the chance of getting into an MD program is 34.5%, for whites, it is 43.6%, for Hispanics, it’s 65.1%, and for AA, 79.4%.

</p>

<p>You would also need to know the number of applicants in the 27-29 category. For blacks, it’s about 1,000 out of 1,300. Approximately 77% of blacks with that score got into med school, if I’m reading that right. For whites, 8,000 out of 13,000 - around 62%. Unfair, right? Maybe, but let’s look at the overall acceptance rates:</p>

<p>Hispanics - 4,694 out of 9,654 = 48.6%
Whites: 37,718 out of 78,764 = 47.9%
Asians: 12,546 out of 28,105 = 44.6%
Blacks: 4,126 out of 10,211 = 39.8%</p>

<p>The percentages of applicants to acceptances is nearly 50% for Latino and whites, 45% for Asians and 40% for Blacks. So…who, exactly, is this big AA boost going towards? Less than 8,900 students accepted to med school that year were black or Latino. Hide ya kids! Hide ya wives!</p>

<p>Mind you, this only accounts for the acceptance rates, not the rates of students who actually went. It also doesn’t tell us who went where - and that’s important as well.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>In my community, the percentage rates would not be as important as the actual number. When I look at the group I would have been in, IIRC, there would have been about 200-250 black students (and 5000 white students) with my MCATS and GPA.</p>

<p>Even if every one of us black students in that group got in and graduated, it seems like such a small number to offer those who might be looking for ethnicity instead of scores. </p>

<p>Not that there’s anything wrong with that. ( yes, that’s a Seinfeld reference).</p>

[MaxineShaw]

<p>Numbers are important. “Ooh, 92% of blacks got this score, while only 80% of whites did!” Yeah, because here are like…15 black people in that category in the first place. </p>

<p>

Again, I get why not everybody would care about that figure, or find it relevant to this discussion.

</p>

<p>Because it’s hard to cry for the poor, poor white students of America when you learn that more whites got into medical school than blacks, Latinos and Asians combined.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>^ I was thinking this is a college admission forum, with individual students and their agenda being more pervasive than a broader, more long term view. </p>

<p>I am happy to report that there are other venues, and more productive ways of spending time, for those who have a broader, more long term view.</p>

<p>I mean YOU Fab!</p>

[Dad_of_3]

<p>

Maybe, but let’s look at the overall acceptance rates:

Is the argument that just because there are more people with low scores in one ethnicity, those with mediocre scores should be accepted over others with better scores because that race doesn’t have as many low scorers?</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>Dad, I’m sure there are other ways you can interpret what I posted. Not sure I’d call it an argument. What I’ve said is that black and African American people might have a different perspective, regardless of income, and I want my kid to go to school with them, as well as various Indigenous, white, Asian, and Hispanic groups. </p>

<p>And I think some people choose services, inkling those of their doctors, based on soemthing more than SAT and GPA, and whatever it is, it’s nice to be able to offer it. </p>

<p>There are at least 8 versions of race FAQs for conjecturing about why the numbers might be different. They are more informative than this one, which was supposed to be different. </p>

<p>Yes, socioeconomic based affirmative action is important, yes we need more attention to education starting with conception, yes, we each need to look in the mirror, and yes, " we " need to be doing things in our own communities. </p>

<p>Signing off to do that now.</p>

[TheBigD]

<p>The ironic thing about Fisher’s lawsuit is that even if the law was changed in her favorite, she probably still wouldn’t be admitted to UT. </p>

<p>Sent from my ADR6300 using CC</p>

[Nrdsb4]

<p>

The ironic thing about Fisher’s lawsuit is that even if the law was changed in her favorite, she probably still wouldn’t be admitted to UT.

</p>

<p>It wouldn’t even matter as she is about to graduate from LSU. I don’t think this lawsuit is about Ms. Fisher, and I wonder if she was ever really invested in it in the first place.</p>

[Nihility]

<p>

They truly do believe that they are where they are because they are the best and the brightest because that is exactly what they are taught, along with everything that minorities have achieved are because they were “given” or “granted” to us by them.

</p>

<p>If you wish to have this opinion dissolved, than perhaps Blacks should begin relying on merit alone. We are all far too familiar with reading through the pages of statistics citing the average SAT scores at flagships (I remember Wisconsin was cited in a recent news story) and seeing the hierarchy of admitted students.
Asians>Whites>Hispanics>Blacks</p>

<p>The average SAT scores for these races at nearly every school in the country fall into this pattern. How do you expect us to respect a race who is clearly subordinate to the others? It cannot be disguised or denied. URMs (Blacks being the worst, then Hispanics) are SEVERELY advantaged in college admissions. Clearly not because of merit, but because they are benefiting from some discrimination suffered by their deceased ancestors. Sounds to me like Whites and Asians, whose stats are generally VERY similar with Asians often leading, have “granted” and “given” the majority of Blacks and Hispanics positions they don’t deserve.</p>

[Nrdsb4]

<p>^^^^^^^^^^Uh oh.</p>