<p>Race will always matter.</p>
<p>UCLA had many lawsuits for affirmative action - and when they don't admit many african americans, they get a bunch of people protesting.</p>
<p>I never understood that whole thing. It's not like their going to purposely not pick African American students. They give you a number... and the evaluate you by that. If African Americans just happened to have lower scores than other nationalities, that's their fault. Don't blame the school, blame the students for having low scores.</p>
<p>It's not the school, but it is not always the student either. You ignore the uneven funding of city/suburban schools, public school districts, older voters with no children who vote against more funding, etc...</p>
<p>Blaming minorities for their scores without context to how the educational system is set up, ignores reality.</p>
<p>Again, since the SATs were rescaled upwards 10 years ago by 100 points, and the averages have not risen much, does that mean that WE are less intelligent because WE have, when usung the early 1990's SAT scales, lower scores? I hope not. We are not always our scores.</p>
<p>Please, race will always matter in the sense that many do not understand the dynamics of being a minority in America. It is not an issue until college admissions because for a good number of non-minorities, it does not touch them--until they apply to schools.</p>
<p>That is when we become self-serving, and suddenly become concerned with fairness--as it applies to us. Ironic that fairness is seldom considered when we benefit from preferencial treatment, especially before college, then bemoan the fact that race and socioeconomic status can be a push factor for those who have not enjoyed that priveledge before admissions to college. </p>
<p>Remember that athletes, legacies, development candidates, people from certain states and regions, and gender can boost applicant as well. So does ED.</p>
<p>And, they say life isn't fair.</p>
<p>No admissions process is perfect. When a university starts to see more and more of one race and fewer and fewer of another, I guarantee you that it's in the back of their minds and they will act on it when it becomes very obvious.</p>
<p>Legal or not, but schools want to keep the diversity. Diversity is very important and helps maintain a schools reputation and prestige.</p>
<p>I grew up in the project in a prodominantly black neighborhood. My parents are dirt poor (hence the project). None of the Afri-Am kids who grew up with me, and went to the same public schools, are attending college. However, 90-95% of the Asian that I grew up with does. I'm currently at BC (so bloody pale!). Now, I don't claim to know enough on national statistic and studies to declare an affirmative statement on the social order, but with my own two eyes I've seen that students living on the same background diverted to two very different path. Is it race? Is it wealth? Is it society? No. It's the individual. Frederick Douglas has a background of a slave, not a gentleman, but noone doubted his intellectual prowess and talent. Why aren't we giving credit to the individual's choice anymore? We didn't choose to our disadvantages, but we can choose to escape it.</p>
<p>California, due to extremely low minority pass rates, several decades back was considering giving "hardship" points to certain bar applicants. In effect, there would have been 2 bar exams, one for whites and asians and another exam for blacks and hispanics.</p>
<p>The idea was shut down (among other reasons) when certain Black Atty Associations in and out of California believed this would stigmatize existing admitted members.</p>
<p>In effect it would amounted to triple affirmative action 1. on undergraduate admission 2. on law school admission 3. on the bar exam - not even counting governmental, corporation, and law firm "diversity" programs, which would have been the 4th layer</p>