Diversity: Explicit Example

<p>Bourne,</p>

<p>
[quote]
I never defined subjectivity in the way that you did. The context in which I used it -- Subjective factors - Socio economic status, Gender, Geographical location ... -- I'm saying, I think it's wrong to include these factors and not include race in certain contexts, or as you say "culture -- specifically racial culture", because I think they all impair someone's ability to succeed.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It’s true that we gave different examples of subjectivity. You selected socioeconomics, gender, and geography. I selected the essay, extracurriculars, and recommendations. (By the way, you still haven’t classified my hypothetical application.)</p>

<p>As I now understand it, your statement “You can't say that subjectivity is valid in some cases, but wrong in others” meant that if I include one subjective factor, then I have to include them all. I don’t agree with your conclusion, but if that’s what you meant to say, fine. Let’s take a look at the second part of that statement – “You can't take into account different factors for one applicant -- and refuse to do the same for another.”</p>

<p>You say we should “use race only in the instances that it can be seen to have been a negative.” Well, aren’t you “tak[ing] into account different factors for one applicant – and refus[ing] to do the same for another?” Yes, you are, so you are still contradicting yourself.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Considering that Harvard’s four-year rate is in the 90s whereas my local university’s rate is in the 20s, yes, it is easier for a person to graduate from Harvard than from my local university. Remember that we’re not talking about which school is harder. We’re talking about which school is harder to get out of. There’s a difference.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fail. How is it "easier for a person to graduate from Harvard" when it is much harder for a person to get into Harvard in the first place? Fewer people are qualified and accepted into Harvard whereas as virtually everyone is qualified and accepted to your local state school; thus, fewer people have a chance at graduating from Harvard than your local state school. Way to demonstrate a dearth of critical thinking skills.</p>

<p>
[quote]
It’s actually comical that you don’t understand the significance of your source not supporting your claim. It means you don’t know how to evaluate your sources, since you picked one that didn’t even back up your statements. The JBHE source you provided has a table of colleges and universities with the highest black graduation rates. Except for the University of Virginia, all the schools listed are private ones. Are Berkeley, Michigan, and Virginia the only top ranked publics? I don’t think so. So, in this case, Virginia is the outlier for “it is markedly different in value from the others of the sample”; it’s public whereas the others are private. There are many more top ranked publics than just those three great universities, so it seems that it is the norm rather than the exception for top ranked publics to not have such high black graduation rates. That is, Berkeley and Michigan are not outliers.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fail.</p>

<p>Did I cite that source as evidence to support my claim that Michigan and Berkeley are outliers? Please see my previous for why I considered these two schools to be outliers.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Talk about irony. Obviously you don’t know much about world history. How many African nations are former European colonies? Hmm, I don’t know about you, but if my nation lost its sovereignty, became a colony, and started teaching about white superiority, I might start thinking that I’m considered to be inferior to whites.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fail. Being enslaved is worse than being colonized. Also, most Europeans did not justify there conquests via racism. It was more just about business. Lastly, both of my parents were average West Africans and went to school with white kids in Africa--because my parents were smart. At the same time, in the US it would not have mattered how smart my parents were; they still would have had to go to an all black school. Even my grandpa (was over 90) remembered playing with white kids and did not understand the idea of race and how it became part of American society.</p>

<p>
[quote]
In the case of China, the last dynasty got a rude awakening in the middle of the nineteenth century when it was soundly defeated by the British in the Opium Wars. No matter how you spin it, China had been totally humiliated by the West. It had to pay an indemnity for losing the war, loan territory, and cede Hong Kong. Again, I don’t know about you, but if my nation was forced to do all those things to one country, I might also ask myself, “Whoa, am I inferior?”

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hahaha.</p>

<p>Fail. Only racists would think like that.</p>

<p>Argh. Those different factors are SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS. THEY'RE HIGH SCHOOL RIGOR. And there is race.</p>

<p>Hypothetically, if all three were shown to limit opportunities of a specific candidate, would you allow for preference to be shown? </p>

<p>And please, respond about your conclusion concerning the graduation differentials. Please tell me you do not honestly believe that. Never ever have I seen a conclusion formed in complete ignorance of millions of other dependent variables. That's just idiocy. Pardon me. But it is. I can not believe you honestly said that.</p>

<p>And as for your hypothetical application. I would prefer it to the current system some schools currently have in place now - the UC system. I just feel if you introduce a factor like socio-economic status, you must also include race within the context that is needs to be included.</p>

<p>Bourne,</p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]

Considering that Harvard’s four-year rate is in the 90s whereas my local university’s rate is in the 20s, yes, it is easier for a person to graduate from Harvard than from my local university. Remember that we’re not talking about which school is harder. We’re talking about which school is harder to get out of. There’s a difference.

[/quote]

You can not possibly believe this. Seriously. You can't. That's the WORST -- the ABSOLUTE WORST -- conclusion I've ever seen in my life.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>As I said, we’re not talking about which school is harder. Obviously, Harvard is harder than my local university. We’re talking about which school is harder TO GET OUT OF. Considering that most students at my local university don’t make it out in four years whereas most students at Harvard do, hmm, I think it’s a fair conclusion that it’s easier to get out of Harvard than to get out of my local university.</p>

<p>Perhaps what actually bothers you is that I’m comparing Harvard to a local university that you’ve never heard of. So, to make you feel better, why don’t I compare Harvard to Cornell?</p>

<p>According to the College Board, Cornell accepts 21% of all applicants. By comparison, Harvard accepts 9% of all applicants. My conclusion? It’s harder to get into Harvard than it is for Cornell. Now, let’s take a look at the four-year graduation rates. “Based on data of full-time degree-seeking freshmen who enrolled for the first time in the fall of 1996…Harvard graduated 86 percent and Cornell graduated 79 percent.” [Source[/url</a>].</p>

<p>Granted, that data is a bit old. On the last page of [url=<a href="http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000403.pdf%5Dthis"&gt;http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000403.pdf]this&lt;/a> source]( <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2004/06/21/pf/college/graduation_rates/%5DSource%5B/url"&gt;http://money.cnn.com/2004/06/21/pf/college/graduation_rates/), there’s a table showing the six-year graduation rates of Cornell and its peer institutions. Cornell’s rates are lower than those of Harvard.</p>

<p>My conclusion? Compared to Harvard, it’s harder to get out of Cornell.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You seem to be suggesting that considering high school quality is no different from considering race. Once again, strict scrutiny answers your question. Race is a suspect class. It’s just not the same thing as high school quality.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>FAIL!</p>

<p>HAHAHHAHAHA! </p>

<p>Why would you even bring up the strict scrutiny test? Considering race passes the strict scrutiny test because pursuing diversity is seen as a societal good and thus a compelling government interest.</p>

<p>
[quote]
We’re talking about which school is harder TO GET OUT OF.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>FAIL! AGAIN!</p>

<p>YOU are talking about this. </p>

<p>Learn how to read posts. I said, "The difficulty of graduating from a school like UMich is very similar to the difficulty of graduating from a school like Harvard, Princeton, etc. To suggest that UMich is somehow "easier" than Harvard [...]." I was clearly referencing academics/etc. not the likelihood of graduating.</p>

<p>You seem to be prone misinterpreting posts...</p>

<p>Newjack88,</p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]

Considering that Harvard’s four-year rate is in the 90s whereas my local university’s rate is in the 20s, yes, it is easier for a person to graduate from Harvard than from my local university. Remember that we’re not talking about which school is harder. We’re talking about which school is harder to get out of. There’s a difference.

[/quote]

Fail. How is it "easier for a person to graduate from Harvard" when it is much harder for a person to get into Harvard in the first place? Fewer people are qualified and accepted into Harvard whereas as virtually everyone is qualified and accepted to your local state school; thus, fewer people have a chance at graduating from Harvard than your local state school. Way to demonstrate a dearth of critical thinking skills.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Clearly, you didn’t pay attention to my last two sentences. Are we talking about which school is harder to get **into, or are we talking about which school is harder *to get **out of*? As I recently posted, Harvard’s acceptance rate is 9%. By comparison, my local university is not selective; it admits most of its applicants. Harvard is harder to get into, but that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about which school is harder to get out of.</p>

<p>
[quote]

Did I cite that source as evidence to support my claim that Michigan and Berkeley are outliers? Please see my previous for why I considered these two schools to be outliers.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You did, and I said that your source doesn’t support your claim. I will repost my reasoning from the paragraph you quoted: “Except for the University of Virginia, all the schools listed are private ones. Are Berkeley, Michigan, and Virginia the only top ranked publics? I don’t think so. So, in this case, Virginia is the outlier for “it is markedly different in value from the others of the sample”; it’s public whereas the others are private. There are many more top ranked publics than just those three great universities, so it seems that it is the norm rather than the exception for top ranked publics to not have such high black graduation rates. That is, Berkeley and Michigan are not outliers.”</p>

<p>Bourne,</p>

<p>
[quote]

Hypothetically, if all three were shown to limit opportunities of a specific candidate, would you allow for preference to be shown?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hypothetically? So there was no source for your claim that race is negatively correlated with academic performance after all! Jeez, why didn’t you say so?</p>

<p>Anyway, I just want to make sure what type of hypothetical research we’re talking about. Does it show correlation or causation? Your language – “shown to limit opportunities” – suggests that it’s causation, but considering how little respect you show for the importance of word choice, I have to ask to make sure.</p>

<p>Thanks for finally classifying my application.</p>

<p>This is sad.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Considering that Harvard’s four-year rate is in the 90s whereas my local university’s rate is in the 20s, yes, it is easier for a person to graduate from Harvard than from my local university. Remember that we’re not talking about which school is harder. We’re talking about which school is harder to get out of. There’s a difference.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What you're saying is your local university is harder to get of for its respective students!!! Not for all students in general! The moment you compare it to Harvard, you imply that it would be just as hard for HARVARD students to get out of it.</p>

<p>You can not make a comparison of this nature. It's just so bogus. If we took a sample set -- a control group of 50 students from each group. Would the graduation percentages hold steady for each group? </p>

<p>This argument has devolved into something else. I'm just surprised you'd even say some of the things you've said. Honestly? I'm shocked. It's taken you this long to get a simple point, and you still refused to answer the hypothetical I proposed moments ago. I don't think there's much left -- not that there ever was.</p>

<p>I posted no example because I'm conveniently using the one you gave me. Mr. Ogbu. For those students whose parents seem less than involved in their studies. Would you provide a small advantage as compared to those "white" students whose parents were more than involved? Or is that just the fault of the children? </p>

<p>You've stated before that you agreed with his conclusions.</p>

<p>fabrizio:</p>

<p>Go back read the post again. You seem to be having trouble comprehending it.</p>

<p>Here's what I said:

[quote]
Lastly, Berkeley and UMich are outliers in this.</p>

<p>Anyway, check out Black Student College Graduation Rates Inch Higher But the Large Racial Gap Persists.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How does "anyway" suggest I am citing that source as evidence?</p>

<p>Here's what I said:

[quote]
Michigan and Berkeley are outliers in that they are high ranking schools with low African American graduation rates. Typically, the higher the school is ranked, the higher the African American graduation rate is.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What the hell does what you said have to do with that? I am talking about high ranking schools in general; you are talking about high ranking public schools.</p>

<p>I was too lazy, but here. Read this. </p>

<p>The</a> Significance of Race in the Racial Gap in Academic Achievement by Pedro A. Noguera and Antwi Akom / Education Rights / In Motion Magazine</p>

<p>Pedro A. Noguera is a Professor in the graduate School of Education at Harvard University. Antwi Akom is a doctoral student in Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania.</p>

<p>Explaining why poor children of color perform comparatively less well in school is generally a less complicated matter. Consistently, such children are educated in schools that, on most measures of quality and funding, are woefully inadequate. This is particularly true in economically depressed urban areas, where bad schools are just one of several obstacles with which poor people must contend. In inner-city schools throughout the United States it has frequently been the case that schools are unable to provide consistent and reliable evidence that the children they serve are learning and provided quality education. Parents often perceive the public schools available to their children as hopeless and unresponsive to their needs, prompting many who can to opt for private schools to withdraw. For those who can not escape, a growing number of parents have actively sought alternatives via vouchers and various privatization schemes. The proliferation of these kinds of educational alternatives in cities such as Milwaukee, Cleveland and Baltimore is yet another sign of the mounting pressure exerted by parents who are no longer willing to accept the status quo.</p>

<p>The stark inequities manifest in inner-city and some rural schools help to explain the low achievement rates of large numbers of poor children, a disproportionate number of whom are African American and Latino. Left unexplained is the lagging performance of middle class and poor African American and Latino children who have access to better schools. This is the question that has prompted fifteen racially integrated, affluent school districts to form a consortium known as the Minority Student Achievement Network. Comprised of districts located in communities such as White Plains, NY, Ann Arbor, Michigan and Berkeley, California, the network seeks to understand the causes of the racial achievement gap and to devise solutions for reversing it.</p>

<p>On the face of it, the potential for success in reducing the gap in these districts would seem to be high. All fifteen school districts in the network have a track record of sending large numbers of affluent White students to the best colleges and universities in the country. Additionally, unlike schools in high poverty areas, funding is largely not a major obstacle to reform. Each of the districts are located in affluent communities with highly educated populations known for their commitment to liberal political and social values. Yet, in all fifteen districts prospects for producing change are hampered by a deeply ingrained sense that even this ambitious, well intentioned effort will fail to alter student outcomes.</p>

<p>To a large degree, much of the pessimism in these districts and many others that have launched efforts to overcome the racial achievement gap can be attributed to the confusion surrounding the relationship between race and student achievement. Lack of clarity on these issues can be seen most clearly at the level of policy and practice. From a policy standpoint, most issues pertaining to race and education have historically centered on efforts to support racial integration in schools. For a variety of reasons, figuring out how to desegregate schools has taken precedence over the need to figure out how to serve the educational needs of a diverse student population. Policies born out of court orders have seldom been based on an understanding of sound educational practice. Moreover, even in the liberal districts in the Minority Student Achievement Network, (some of which were among the first in the nation to voluntarily de-segregate) the arrival of significant numbers of students of color in the late 60's and early 70's was met with considerable opposition. From the very beginning, the presence of African American children, especially those from low income families, was perceived as a "challenge" to which to respond because the children were typically perceived as disadvantaged and deficient in comparison to their white schoolmates. Framed as "problems" and "challenges" from the very start, it is hardly surprising that the education of students of color would continue to be treated as a problem requiring special interventions years later.</p>

<p>In addition to policy, educational practices often have the effect of favoring privileged students and hindering the educational opportunities of poorer students specifically, and African American and Latino students generally. This is particularly true with respect to the various strategies employed by schools to track and sort students on the basis of some measure of ability and acumen. A large body of research has shown that students of color are more likely to be excluded from classes for those deemed "gifted" in primary school, and from honors and advanced placement courses in high school. The Education Trust has shown, through its research on science and math education, that even students of color who meet the criteria for access to advanced courses are more likely to be restricted based on the recommendation of a counselor or teacher. They are also more likely to be placed in remedial and special education classes, and to be subject to varying forms of school discipline.</p>

<p>Newjack88,</p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]

[quote]

The advantage is that these immigrants do not/did not know they were considered to be inferior to whites. Dude, I am not here to school you in history. Make an effort and inform yourself.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Talk about irony. Obviously you don’t know much about world history. How many African nations are former European colonies? Hmm, I don’t know about you, but if my nation lost its sovereignty, became a colony, and started teaching about white superiority, I might start thinking that I’m considered to be inferior to whites.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fail. Being enslaved is worse than being colonized. Also, most Europeans did not justify there conquests via racism. It was more just about business. Lastly, both of my parents were average West Africans and went to school with white kids in Africa--because my parents were smart. At the same time, in the US it would not have mattered how smart my parents were; they still would have had to go to an all black school. Even my grandpa (was over 90) remembered playing with white kids and did not understand the idea of race and how it became part of American society.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you realize how often you switch subjects? First, you’re talking about immigrants. Now, you’re talking about slaves.</p>

<p>If you’re not switching topics, then you’re calling people who disagree with you failures. Oi…</p>

<p>I think it’s fair to say that in any colony, the natives are at best second-class citizens. When your country loses its sovereignty to outsiders, I think it is normal, though not necessarily common, to think that the outsiders are superior.</p>

<p>Bourne,</p>

<p>
[quote]
I posted no example because I'm conveniently using the one you gave me. Mr. Ogbu. For those students whose parents seem less than involved in their studies. Would you provide a small advantage as compared to those "white" students whose parents were more than involved? Or is that just the fault of the children? </p>

<p>You've stated before that you agreed with his conclusions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First, Dr. Ogbu did not observe a correlation between being black and being involved less in the children’s education. He simply observed that the black parents had a different educational philosophy than the white parents. Consequently, why should I provide a small advantage? Your parents have a suboptimal way of doing things, so I should give you a boost for that? Maybe you don’t think that’s ridiculous, but I do.</p>

<p>Newjack88,</p>

<p>
[quote]

How does "anyway" suggest I am citing that source as evidence?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you didn’t use that link as your source for your statement, “Lastly, Berkeley and UMich are outliers in this,” then what is your source? As you noted, an outlier is a point on a sample. Where’s your sample? Link, please.</p>

<p>Ok. And the article?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do you realize how often you switch subjects? First, you’re talking about immigrants. Now, you’re talking about slaves.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you seriously need everything spelled out for you? Also, that is amusing you find that "switching subjects." It's totally relevant if you are up to speed with the current conversation.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think it’s fair to say that in any colony, the natives are at best second-class citizens.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fail. That's a baseless claim right there. You must think that South Africa is the norm for white-African relations; well, it's not.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When your country loses its sovereignty to outsiders, I think it is normal, though not necessarily common, to think that the outsiders are superior.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fail.</p>

<p>What the heck are you basing that claim off of?</p>

<p>Bourne,</p>

<p>
[quote]
A large body of research has shown that students of color are more likely to be excluded from classes for those deemed "gifted" in primary school, and from honors and advanced placement courses in high school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is your source? This is what makes the “Hypothetically…” into reality?</p>

<p>“More likely” means correlation, not causation. Consequently, you can’t conclude that race “limit[s] opportunities of a specific candidate.” If race limits opportunities, then race is a cause. Not surprisingly, your source makes no assertion about causality. It says students “of color” are more likely to have limited opportunities. That is, there is a relationship between being “of color” and being excluded from gifted, honors, and AP courses. However, you can’t claim that being “of color” limits the opportunities (i.e. is the cause.) That is not what they found.</p>

<p>Something is normal and yet it's not common? That sounds almost oxymoronic. </p>

<p>Seems as though he's talking about the British/Indian relationship of the 20th century.</p>

<p>I think he's stating that for those students -- being of a certain race resulted in having less opportunities because of certain racial connotations. That's pure causality. That's not correlation. In those specific cases he studied, they were limited because of discrimination. That's just purely obvious. </p>

<p>You seem to be confusing yourself by turning it around. </p>

<p>They were passed over and limited because of their race. It's just backwards. The cause is discrimination. The effect is they not being able to have similar opportunities. </p>

<p>Now. I ask. Why were they discriminated against?</p>

<p>Bourne,</p>

<p>"The black parents feel it is their role to move to Shaker Heights, pay the higher taxes so their kids could graduate from Shaker, and that's where their role stops," Ogbu says during an interview at his home in the Oakland hills. "They believe the school system should take care of the rest. They didn't supervise their children that much. They didn't make sure their children did their homework. That's not how other ethnic groups think."</p>

<p>[url= <a href="http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/PrintFriendly?oid=285317%5DSource%5B/url"&gt;http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/PrintFriendly?oid=285317]Source[/url&lt;/a&gt;].&lt;/p>

<p>fabrizio:</p>

<p>You still haven't given a valid answer as to why colleges should consider socio-economic class and not race. It seems that you are for considering everything except race... Why?</p>

<p>
[quote]
"The black parents feel it is their role to move to Shaker Heights, pay the higher taxes so their kids could graduate from Shaker, and that's where their role stops," Ogbu says during an interview at his home in the Oakland hills. "They believe the school system should take care of the rest. They didn't supervise their children that much. They didn't make sure their children did their homework. That's not how other ethnic groups think."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think that members of other ethnicities are also partially to blame as well. A lot of times minorities feel as though they are being pressured to play a predetermined role. It's not simply about making sure the child is doing homework; it's about letting the child know that he or she should be strong and not let others decide who he or she should be.</p>