Diversity: Explicit Example

Student Lounge College Life
21

<p>The question in the original post wouldn't surprise me. I've been asked to give my perspective as a black person on affirmative action (and I'm mixed and consider myself black AND white, not black). People in general can be pretty racially insensitive, so it's really no surprise. I'd say I've had, oh, 4567894567 complete strangers grab my hair when I wear it naturally, ask what am, ask who my "people" are, or just randomly start speaking in Spanish to me.</p>

<p>I really don't think I'd be able to offer a different insight on literature because of my race, and I don't like that assumption either.</p>

22

<p>It's just a bad example. A horrible one. </p>

<p>That's not encouraging diversity at all. It's encouraging ignorance and actually, one could call that segregation.</p>

<p>Btw, it's kinda funny how you guys named then Jamal and Deshaun.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
a man might not be discredited or thought worse of for hiring an underqualified female secretary, but a woman would almost certainly face more scrutiny for hiring a boy-toy receptionist or something.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It could also be because men value women's looks a lot more than vice versa. Or a combination of both. </p>

<p>Also, that's the problem with affirmative action. If you're going to sacrifice candidates of demographic A to hire/accept candidates of demographic B, of course the qualifications of demographic B will be questioned, and I think such a questioning is quite legitimate.</p>

24

<p>OK maybe I wasn't clear enough about the intention of the example I gave. First off, this hasn't actually happened in my presence. I came up with it as an illustrative example of diversity. Second, let me briefly explain what the example was intended to demonstrate. </p>

<p>Colleges engage in affirmative actions admissions. They clearly lower the standard for blacks and hispanics. Now one could argue that this is justified given the economic background of these applicants. Fine, that's not the point. Then many continue on to say, "Well it's ok that we lower the standard because colleges need racial and ethnic diversity." Yet, the previous statement is a PC way of saying, "We want black people to give their own unique perspective on issues. They'll have a unique perspective, different from whites and Asians, specifically because they're black." So the example was an illustrative case of the previous statement.</p>

<p>Finally, let me add my own opinion of this situation. I think it's atrocious. I think colleges are engaging in racist thought by trying to increase racial diversity so that URM's can give their "own unique perspective." People are individuals, not part of a collective, and thus can't be asked to speak for others who happen to share genetic material.</p>

<p>[Note: Also, we know that diversity is specifically ethnic and racial because colleges lower the standard for middle and upper class blacks and hispanics, as well as poor ones. Finally, one poster mentioned that colleges also try to incorporate other types of diversity. Umm that's crapp. I don't recall colleges asking me if I was a moderate conservative or a flaming liberal or if I went to church every week or was an atheist.]</p>

25

<p>Responding very simply and selectively:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>You're saying that your original scenario actually illustrates, in a fair and reasonable way, what colleges are attempting to gain by increasing diversity? Numerous respondents here, as I've understood, saw your original point. I/we're disagreeing that you're hypothetical scenario actually represents what you think it does, in the way you think it does. The situation can't be boiled down like this. I think post #7, in particular, gave a nice response.</p></li>
<li><p>Geographical diversity. Economic diversity. Diversity of interests + talents. Diversity of academic goals/interests. It's pretty well known that many schools take some or all of the above into account. A number of schools also have optional diversity essays, or spaces for additional info. If you think that your background as a flaming liberal or an avid church-goer would contribute something unique and positive to your application (and to the campus, should you choose to attend), or give cause for special evaluation, then by all means, share.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>I'm not arguing for or against anything here, I just think that you're oversimplifying this situation, and you're saying "clearly" when things aren't. I understand your point, and it's not a bad one, but IMO, you're building it without much of a foundation.</p>

<p>In your eyes, is there a better way for colleges to be addressing this issue? You disagree with what you see as the rationale, and the process...do you disagree with the outcome?</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
OK maybe I wasn't clear enough about the intention of the example I gave. First off, this hasn't actually happened in my presence. I came up with it as an illustrative example of diversity. Second, let me briefly explain what the example was intended to demonstrate. </p>

<p>Colleges engage in affirmative actions admissions. They clearly lower the standard for blacks and hispanics. Now one could argue that this is justified given the economic background of these applicants. Fine, that's not the point. Then many continue on to say, "Well it's ok that we lower the standard because colleges need racial and ethnic diversity." Yet, the previous statement is a PC way of saying, "We want black people to give their own unique perspective on issues. They'll have a unique perspective, different from whites and Asians, specifically because they're black." So the example was an illustrative case of the previous statement.</p>

<p>Finally, let me add my own opinion of this situation. I think it's atrocious. I think colleges are engaging in racist thought by trying to increase racial diversity so that URM's can give their "own unique perspective." People are individuals, not part of a collective, and thus can't be asked to speak for others who happen to share genetic material.</p>

<p>[Note: Also, we know that diversity is specifically ethnic and racial because colleges lower the standard for middle and upper class blacks and hispanics, as well as poor ones. Finally, one poster mentioned that colleges also try to incorporate other types of diversity. Umm that's crapp. I don't recall colleges asking me if I was a moderate conservative or a flaming liberal or if I went to church every week or was an atheist.]

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You compromised your argument the moment you posted that first example. For you to first assume that an opinion of one who's grown up under different circumstances doesn't give them a different perspective is ridiculous. I'm sure adcoms can differentiate through area, school, and essays -- the different circumstances under each applicant has been raised. For you to also assume that diversity and race are strictly separate is also wrong.</p>

<p>I do think colleges appreciate differences between applicants. Your own unique set of qualities can be shown through essays and extracurriculars. There's a reason that some people on this site use the term, "Typical Asian Ec's". </p>

<p>In some ways, I think perspective holds enough weight to command a spot as a determinant in the college admissions process. It's a societal assumption that colleges should base their admissions on a pure meritocracy with complete ignorance of the Social Darwinistic philosophies that will soon follow, but I challenge you -- explain to me why that's an absolute necessity? Who decided that a true meritocracy was fair? Is that just natural instinct? Why can't perspective -- a difference in perspective -- hold some weight?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, that's the problem with affirmative action. If you're going to sacrifice candidates of demographic A to hire/accept candidates of demographic B, of course the qualifications of demographic B will be questioned, and I think such a questioning is quite legitimate.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really eh? So should we include every group that has enjoyed the benefits of AA -- including women -- and classify their exploits with an asterisk because they MIGHT have enjoyed certain advantages at any point in their lives? If it counts for one, it counts for all right? Every woman at Caltech -- do we underscore their achievements? Do we classify every rich person as only being deserving because of the wealth they enjoyed as a child? Do we assume that every underprivileged person who enters the circle of poverty is there because of his original status? </p>

<p>It's just another bad method of stereotyping.</p>

27

<p>The other point to consider is that most college admissions are holistic. Things like SAT scores and GPA can only take an application so far. Colleges look for students they believe will succeed and flourish at their campus, and for students who will actively contribute and give back to campus life. The admissions process isn't all about numbers, volunteer hours, or extra-curriculars. Trying to measure or quantify intelligence or academic success is more of an art than a science, and admissions officers are looking to balance their class out with bright, interesting, and motivated individuals.</p>

<p>Saying they "lower the standard" for those applicants, I think, is a slightly misguided phrase. If they lower the standard for those applicants, then the standard is similarly lowered for rural, male, first generation, international, etc. applicants. The same way a student at an elite prep school can be admitted with 10+ APs, while a student from a rural town in the midwest can be admitted with the one or two that his or her school offers, admissions officers are judging candidates in light of: their background, what they bring to the college, what they contributed to their community, and what the officers are looking to bring into the freshman class.</p>

<p>One of the points that essay talked about--white privilege--was essentially that if you're white, your credentials can't be challenged because of your race. While affirmative action may have helped one student gain a leg up, there's no reason to assume that every black or hispanic applicant was of a lower caliber than the average white applicant. Just like the example in the first post--a black student being called on to represent an entire race--making assumptions about the quality of all minority applicants diminishes them and deindividualizes them. I think the goal of AA (however misguided the system may be) and the goal of admissions in general is to judge each applicant on their individual merits, not necessarily in comparison to the rest of the applicants.</p>

28

<p>
[quote]

When a campus has hundreds, thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of students, and major segments of the population are still missing, or are totally swallowed up by the majority, that's problematic for multiple reasons.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don’t think it’s problematic. We aren’t living in an era of segregation. The days where a child who lives within walking distance of a school can be denied entrance on the basis of race are gone, thank God. Having a chance and not making it is completely different from not having a chance at all.</p>

29

<p>Thirdfloor gets it.</p>

30

<p>Translation: Thirdfloor agrees with me.</p>

31

<p>
[quote]
there's no reason to assume that every black or hispanic applicant was of a lower caliber than the average white applicant.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, but there's reason to ponder if the average admitted black or hispanic student was of a lower caliber than the average white or Asian student.</p>

32

<p>fabrizio:
I was just posting to say I agreed with her.</p>

33

<p>What an idiot professor (if he existed). Black perspective. Wow. Its dumb stuff like this that I consider candied racism. Diversity is about combining the races, not singling them out.</p>

34

<p>On a tangential note: one of my coworkers--who happens to be Cambodian--is applying to med school. When asked by my other coworkers why she applied to Howard (they argued that she'd stick out like a sore thumb, which she would), she replied that she didn't know it was so overwhelmingly black: she picked it because it had the lowest average matriculant GPA and MCAT of schools in the region.</p>

<p>But what could that possibly show?</p>

<p>Edit: Diversity is about appreciating and respecting all races, not combining them. If everyone was a shade of light brown, there'd be no diversity, now, would there?</p>

35

<p>"One of the points that essay talked about--white privilege--was essentially that if you're white, your credentials can't be challenged because of your race. While affirmative action may have helped one student gain a leg up, there's no reason to assume that every black or hispanic applicant was of a lower caliber than the average white applicant. Just like the example in the first post--a black student being called on to represent an entire race--making assumptions about the quality of all minority applicants diminishes them and deindividualizes them."</p>

<p>I think the point you're missing is that these "assumptions" about minorities that make it through the admissions process or make it in the professional world exist primarily because of affirmative action. Affirmative action is only contributing to the problem it is trying to solve.</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
I think the point you're missing is that these "assumptions" about minorities that make it through the admissions process or make it in the professional world exist primarily because of affirmative action. Affirmative action is only contributing to the problem it is trying to solve.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think the point you're missing is that these people would not make those "assumptions" if they did not feel some sense of entitlement/privilege. Anyway, what problem is Affirmative Action addressing? I thought it was addressing a lack of representation of certain groups? I do not see how it is solving yet contributing to that problem?</p>

37

<p>
[quote]
I think the point you're missing is that these people would not make those "assumptions" if they did not feel some sense of entitlement/privilege.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You cannot automatically attribute those assumptions to entitlement or prestige:</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you're going to sacrifice candidates of demographic A to hire/accept candidates of demographic B, of course the qualifications of demographic B will be questioned

[/quote]
</p>

38

<p>
[quote]
You cannot automatically attribute those assumptions to entitlement or prestige:

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think in many cases it's accurate to do so.</p>

<p>People typically questions others' qualifications when they feel as though they are more qualified/feel entitled. It does not make sense for someone who sees themself as unqualified/not entitled to question the qualifications of someone else.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you're going to sacrifice candidates of demographic A to hire/accept candidates of demographic B, of course the qualifications of demographic B will be questioned

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You seem to be forgetting that some candidates of demographic A will be sacrificed for other candidates of demographic A. Also, this whole example is based on the assumption that for one reason or another--test scores, GPA, etc.--candidates of demographic A are entitled to jobs/spots. </p>

<p>I think that people should quit pretending they know what qualifications they need to land a specific job or to gain admittance into HYP.</p>

39

<p>
[quote]
Finally, one poster mentioned that colleges also try to incorporate other types of diversity. Umm that's crapp. I don't recall colleges asking me if I was a moderate conservative or a flaming liberal or if I went to church every week or was an atheist.

[/quote]
Umm, I think that's why they ask for a list of your extra-curricular activities-they quite often can figure out whether or not you're a "flaming liberal", chuch-goer, french horn player, etc. (i.e. you bring some type of diversity) from that list.</p>

40

<p>If it's not entitlement/privilege, then why are only specific groups targeted?</p>