<p>Geez where are all the folks who want holistic admissions and free rein for a university to assemble the "perfect" class irrespective of those nasty old SAT scores and GPAs? I thought there was more to education than just numbers. Aren't all of these kids at America's "elite" universities going to have to deal with dim white folks when they get out of school? How are we going to prepare them for the reality dim white folks if they don't have them in the classroom? Isn't it a good idea to expose the minority kids who may have spent most of their lives in largely segregated comunities to the reality that most white folks are halogen bulbs?</p>
<p>Sure higherlead, that is true. But so many blacks who go to predominantly white middle and high schools are tracked and even if they are great in athletics they aren't getting the required scores to further their careers at great colleges, even if all they have going for them is athletics. Inner city schools, while having a larger ratio of blacks who never make it (jail, drugs, death, illiteracy...) also probably produce most of the black men and women who go on to reach an acceptable and respectable socioeconomic position in society. </p>
<p>Where I'm from, it is by far predominantly white and very wealthy (although it's hard for us to break through the marble money ceiling). But for some strange reason blacks, particularly the males, aren't reaching their potential. Drugs like ecstasy and marijuana (and others) flow so freely, many young women don't even date the opposite sex, and if they do, they're having babies at young ages by fathers who have "street dreams." The older generation doesn't know how to deal with the younger generation, so they ostracize them to death while they go to church 3-5 days a week, hoping for a miracle. That's OK, but some of their behavior is no better than the younger people's, they just think church on sunday makes it all better. </p>
<p>Now I wish I had some answers and I've tried some things, but we as a people must lose the "crab in the barrel" mentality. With my background and with where I'm at today (UPenn), all I can do is try to be the best example I can to so many of those younger brothers that are out on those same blocks I used to hang out on.</p>
<p>What is "crab in the barrel" mentality, DatDude?</p>
<p>Crabs climbing out of a barrel are usually pulled back down by their barrel mates. It's an analogy that is quite apt for the black kids who are criticized for "acting white" when they strive for academic achievements.</p>
<p>Couldn't have said it better myself StickerShock.</p>
<p>A very good one - better than tired old "peer pressure."</p>
<p>In today's "Daily Pennsylvanian," a guest columnist named Simeon McMillan wrote a brilliant article on the Jena six case entitled, "The revolution will not be televised." It is superbly written, hits all the right notes and quite frankly, I'm surprised (albeit ecstatic) that they printed such powerful truth. If media like this is allowed to consistently hit the mainstream, if nothing else, the racist element in our country will be VERY uncomfortable.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If it were "at elite colleges - dim black kids" imagine the uproar that would ensue! Why aren't people angered at this title as well?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, because Black people have been equal to White people in the history and current culture of America. I agree that it's insensitive and reeks of sensationalism, but the old switcheroo argument is woefully naive.</p>
<p>
[quote]
First of all, consider how much the Ivies suck at sports. Now imagine what would happen if we could only have athletes that got in on academic merit. We wouldn't even be able to fill up a roster for most sports. Secondly, I think athletes add some sort of diversity to campus. Not religious or economic or racial, but diversity of personality. Athletes can add a more humorous, fun-loving attitude to campus and remind us that it's ok to focus on something other than hitting the books.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So the raison d'etre for having athletes is to fill up roster spaces on sports team? That's brilliant logic. </p>
<p>Sure, they may bring diversity, but it's usually of the negative kind. At my school, there is a football frat that is easily the most sexist group of guys in the school. Simply put, they'd see nothing wrong with date rape as long as the girl drank her surreptitiously spiked cocktail out of her free will. Okay, a lot of frats may have this mentality, but few would loudly boast of it all the time.</p>
<p>I don't see the value of the diversity of having athletes on campus, especially when AA cases and "Asian math grinds" are viewed as unwanted leeches.</p>
<p>Sports and the school spirit that accompany them are an integral part of the college experience that I think should be sustained, so yes, the raison d'etre is to fill up roster spaces, if you want to put it that bluntly. I'm not advocating throwing out all standards for athletes, but a slight lowering of standards isn't necessarily a bad thing.</p>
<p>You yourself employed some brillant logic when you deduced that one football frat at your school is representative of all athletes and that their poor behavior is due to the fact that they are athletes.</p>
<p>I never said that I find AA cases and nerdy Asians "unwanted leeches". They're very much important parts of a diverse campus. I just think that if race, something that a person has no control over, can be considered in admissions, then athletic ability should be considered as well.</p>
<p>Is it me or is the implication of some of the previous posts suggesting that black athletes in the ivies or any where else are largely only their because of their athletic prowess??</p>
<p>Between comments like those and the implication that blacks are largely at quality schools because of AA, It just seems like there's always a "reason" why blacks attend good schools other than them deserving to be there because of their academic acheivement.</p>
<p>Datdude, there is a common perception that athletes of ALL races are studying at ivies & elite schools only because of their athletic prowess. Black athletes were brought up on this thread because the problem of lowered academic standards for football players at Rutgers was referenced. The low-stat athletes that caused such an outrage from RU alums were black kids. </p>
<p>I would imagine that a high stat black kid attending an elite school would get frustrated if others assume he is there because of AA or other boosts. But the data shows that there IS a boost for black kids, so that assumption, while an unfair generalization, is not a crazy one. Therein lies the AA dilemma --- We can argue that it is necessary, but blacks will always be tainted by the "token" or "couldn't make it without AA boost" perception.</p>
<p>I don't agree at all. It's always 20-30 years later when the conspiracy comes out, like the SAT's being biased, racial profiling, COINTELPRO...Basically low stats don't prove anything but that one group lacks equal opportunity and other groups aren't nearly as oppressed. Steve Nash won two MVP's, but had the lowest "stats" as anyone to win it, probably ever (and his team never even made it to the finals. Blacks never had it that good, even in a sport they dominate exclusively. I wonder why?). And who are you to say that blacks will always be tainted by a perception, when perception is in the eyes of the individual? </p>
<p>And wouldn't it have been nice if the Jena 6, Emmit Till, Mike Vick, Nelson Mandela, Bonds, OJ and millions of other blacks received a "boost" of justice and fair treatment? </p>
<p>Don't put the cart before the horse. AA is only necessary because of the absence of justice, fairness and equality in the world. Get it??</p>
<p>I almost agreed with Datdude until I read OJ's name in the list. The shoe is definately on the other foot - if he had not been black he would have been fried years ago. That is AA gone friggin crazy.</p>
<p>Well let's face it, how many people won trial and have to go through what he goes through now? He should be a man and let them fry him, cause he basically has no rights and I just don't understand that.</p>
<p>We love dim white rich kids (DWRK) here is why</p>
<ol>
<li> DWRK pay for full aid that daughter can not afford.</li>
<li> Most of these DWRK kids are very friendly and nice people </li>
<li> These DWRK kids provide potential future lucrative contact to poor kids like mine. My daughter has an opportunity to meet people with high level of contact, without these DWRK kids H will not be H and if all these DMRK kids start going to Boondog University then my daughter will follow them to Boondog University and not Harvard as after graduating from H she has lesser of a chance to get a good opportunity.</li>
<li> DWRK kid with their money and resources makes Harvard a better college, without them Harvard will loose its reputation and will face similar problems like the famous universities in England in attracting better kids who need money to go to a college</li>
<li> If DWRK kids are very smart, then they do not need somebody to work as they can manage their own money and companies. </li>
<li> DWRK kids needs somebody to manage their money and whom they are going to trust, the person with whom they have associated and they can trust, - very unlikely to give a job offer to a person from street that they have never met and can not trust. </li>
<li> In this process DWRK kids benefit by meeting a smart kid and a smart kid achieve similar success by providing better skills and associating with DWRK kids. It is a mutually beneficial phenomenon for both. </li>
<li> If you see, in the real life a future progeny of a bright kid becomes a DRK (dim rich) kids too as these new DRK has less motivation to work hard. So cycles repeat.</li>
</ol>
<p>I have never thought about it like that.</p>
<p>I understand that it's important for a school to have money, but it's not fair that the smarter kids don't get into a college that they're better qualified for.</p>
<p>For better or worse life is not fair. This is the way life works out. Through money, rich people influence the outcome in their favor. If they can not win favors than what is the use of their money? Look how many US presidential candidates from both parties’ are raising money to run for US presidency. Money buys these people favors. So policies will help the rich and not the masses.</p>
<p>double post</p>
<p>Qualifications include more than book smarts. There are the intangibles.;-)</p>
<p>Barrons:</p>
<p>Yes you are right. Bookish person do not become chairman of a company or provide better job opportunies to other people. They become professors.</p>
<p>I was just telling that admiitng only bookish student is a bad idea.</p>