<p>"From anecdotal evidence, it would appear that the misconception of Asians bearing a large brunt of the affirmative action programs remains hard to dispel, despite the lack of evidence. It also appears that the fact that, having benefitted from affirmative action policies in the past, Asians are now massively “over-represented” in terms of racial distribution in higher education does not seem to stop the unsuccessful claims of discrimination. </p>
True, but if 80% are admitted through the top 10% policy as you’ve stated, the competition for the remaining 20% is obviously competitive. The point of my earlier post is quite simple – the students from the elite privates and distinguished publics are at a disadvantage in UT admissions. My friend’s D, for example, got in to UT from a mediocre public with a 1550/2400 on her SAT and a 3.6 UW and 2 APs while kids I know from our private with fabulous stats get in to BC, Wake, NYU, UNC and yet get capped or rejected from UT? Huh?</p>
<p>I have no vested interest in Texas schools. We lived in Plano for 2 blessedly short years many years ago…I think the impact of the competition for top 10% seeps down into the 4 year olds… let me say.</p>
<p>But, the point I actually want to make is that perhaps, and I have not read the mission statement, UTexas is meant to be representative simply of ALL of Texas, not of the parts of Texas where people start vying to be top 10% when they are 4 years old. Maybe they want a campus that does not look like Plano East or HIghland Park High? If there weren’t the 10% rule, would there simply not be enough geographic diversity, is this a concern?</p>
<p>As for the idiocy of AA for the A (the last A being affluent) it strikes me as a relatively straightforwards thing to resolve. There is a 2 step process to qualifying- the first is related to some metric of hardship and the second is related to some metric of diversity. </p>
<p>Two girls I know who are at Harvard are 1/16th native american and their father is VP of a major oil company. Neither would have been admitted without the 1/16th given the others who were overlooked in their classes so that they could have their spots. But, Harvard gets to ‘count’ them and that was enough.</p>
<p>Because it’s not really a question that has a simple yes/no answer. For that to be the case, we’d at least all have to agree on what we mean by “affirmative action”. Do we? </p>
<p>Does affirmative action necessarily entail a system of racial quotas? If Stanford doesn’t have that, is it necessarily not practicing AA?</p>
<p>Is it enough to give any “consideration” at all to race in admissions? If Stanford admits some AA applicants with lower SAT scores than some white students it rejects, does that alone amount to practicing affirmative action? How do we know how strong a role race alone played, since the decision is a “holistic” one that considers so many other factors?</p>
<p>I’ve been reading Charles Murray’s new book about inequality in America and I’ve been finding myself thinking a lot about these diversity issues. </p>
<p>In our neighborhood, there is a Hispanic cardiologist whose son was just invited to participate in a special weekend at a top school in our area. Apparently he’s been wooed as a diversity admit for the engineering program though he doesn’t do as well in math and science as our son and he’s not in any honors classes. He’ll be driving to the event in his brand new car which Daddy bought. (It’s a shame he’s so deprived.) Mommy doesn’t work, but she spends lots of time at the gym and getting her hair done.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, there’s a very nice 15 year old Caucasian girl down the street who probably won’t go to college. Her mom is a bit flighty and she’s on her third husband and there’s currently SEVEN other kids in the house, through a variety of marriages. The girl spends most of her time working at the grocery store, and their house is in foreclosure. No one invited her to a college weekend.</p>
<p>There’s a ten year old Caucasian girl next door who is always taking care of her five year old twin brothers because her dad abandoned left the family and apparently isn’t paying child support. Mom is always working. I don’t think there’s much homework being done in the house. </p>
<p>In his book, Murray says that the great divides in America now are really class-based and not based on race. I’ve found myself thinking that if I was in charge of an admissions office anywhere, I’d add some new questions to the admissions application in light of the recession:
How many times has your family moved during high school?
have you ever been homeless
Is your house in foreclosure
Has either parent ever lost a job in the last five years
Have you ever dropped out of an after school activity in order to work
Are there activities that you might have pursued further, had you been able to afford them?
Do you provide any childcare for younger family members</p>
<p>I think questions like this might do a better job of figuring out who might actually need a leg up, over simply asking someone’s race. And presumably, they’d be harder to falsify.</p>
<p>I thought the lawsuit was saying that in addition to the 10% automatic admit, UT is giving ADDITIONAL PREFERENCES to minorities. I think the questions to be asked include, at what point is AA excessive? While I am sympathetic to the arguement that the electorate should answer these questions, is that fair if whites become a minority in any jurisdiction?</p>
<p>Momzie, there are a lot of inequities and ineffeciencies. I read the close to 100 page report that NY ordered on the basketball program at SUNY Binghamton after a number of problems. The report indicated that some of the problems were not limited to athletes, but were occuring among many african americans. One thing really annoyed me, that the AD was encouraging kids to transfer to an academic program they regarded as less challenging (something like human development). If the kid wanted that program, fine. But what I got out of this, was a kid who might have been an accounting major at a less selective SUNY (or more likely CUNY) is recruited to a flagship state U, and ends up with less of an education than he might have had.</p>
<p>^^ kayf and also Momzie, below are the factors UT considers when reviewing all applicants for admission via holistic review, i.e., anyone who is not an auto admit based on class rank:</p>
<p>The Academic Index (AI)
[ul][<em>]Class rank
[</em>]Completion of UT required high school curriculum
[<em>]ACT/SAT score[/ul] The Personal Achievement Index (PAI)
[ul][</em>]Scores on two essays
[<em>]Leadership
[</em>]Extracurricular Activities
[<em>]Awards/honors
[</em>]Work experience
[<em>]Service to school or community
[</em>]Special circumstances:
�� Socio‐economic status of family
�� Single parent home
�� Language spoken at home
�� Family responsibilities
�� Socio‐economic status of school attended
�� Average ACT/SAT of school attended in relation to student’s own ACT/SAT
�� Race (authorized by the UT Board of Regents in 2003 and implemented in 2005)[/ul]</p>
<p>“is that fair if whites become a minority in any jurisdiction?”</p>
<p>Why would its fairness depend on which group is in the minority? Some group or coalition always controls a majority of a given electorate. There’s always potential that that majority will design policies that benefit it at the expense of the minority.</p>
<p>Hanna, my point is that to rely on the elected officials to decide when things arent fair kinda falls down when they are protecting the majortiy at the expense of the minority. Thats when courts should get involved.</p>
<p>Hi, kayf, yes, you’ll note “race” is the final factor on the “Special Circumstances” list posted above. It was added after Grutter decision permitted use of race in admissions. </p>
<p>This case isn’t really about the technicalities of UT admissions, although UT will factually defend its good faith use of race as a factor in the manner contemplated by the Grutter Court. The crux of Fisher is whether this Court will affirm the use of race as a factor or take it away.</p>
<p>Tx, I dont know whether race being listed as the last item means it is given less or more weight than other factors. I suspect that what the court will be talking about, in chambers, is at what point does a school go too far. That the top 10% rule provides for diversity, should the school be going further.</p>
<p>^kayf, my bad, I misunderstood the import of your comment! I don’t agree the Court will try to quantify the use of race. That harkens back to quotas and the like.</p>