<p>"For all who don’t understand the need for AA. Here’s one of your own telling a good story.</p>
<p>At the intersection of privilege and college admissions: An apology of a former Abigail Fisher"</p>
<p>I read the above. There are some serious problems with what this writer has said. First of all, the way it works with Affirmative Action and URMs, is that it is NOT a tip factor but a big fat flag, a banner. That is what the difference can and often is for highly selective admissions. It’s not an “all things equal, but” situation. It make a huge difference. </p>
<p>The other issue that the writer does not seem to take into account, and this is a huge lacking in her case, is that a lot of those students accepted through Affirmative Action are NOT those who were looking for their next meal, or in poverty situations. They are often middle class, upper middle class and down right wealthy students who happen to be of color. Of the many, many URMs that I personally know who have been accepted to the highly selective school, the vast majority were full pay kids from families very much like mine. I have childhood friend who happens to be a full professor, lives in a million dollar house and is also AA. His kids were considered URMs and got the full admissions advantage purely because of their indicating that they were AA. Nothing to do with economic or other family challenges. Did they suffer from ethnic slurs, bigotry, and dangers because they were black? Probably. How much more than other kids who had issues of that sort who were not? I don’t know, but from a number of people I know, they will out and out say, probably not. Their kids lived privileged and safeguarded lives as compared to the vast majority of kids of any color and ethnicity. The URM affirmative action quarter given is solely because schools want this diversity in color/race and ethnicity. Yes, they do also take into consideration adverse family situations and economic hardships (and I do apologize, as need is taken into account in that regard, as a hardship factor), but that is a whole other story and occurs in families of all ethnic groups.</p>
<p>I find it insulting to AAs that the article and apology seems to link AAs to adverse family and economic situaton.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter, is that the whole crux of affirmative action, and what is really an issue is that the color/race/ethinicity is given admissions points, not that a person’s disadvantages are taken into consideration. The truth is that a well to do URM prospect is given that URM advantage because of his race. SImple as that. And that is where the bone of contention lies. I don’t know anyone who will begrudge someone who has had more obstacle to overcome, the tie breaker. It’s when it’s more than just a tie breaker and when the the decision is based on color. A well to do URM of color has a better chance these days of getting accepted at highly selective school than a non URM who has an adverse family/economic situation and identical files. URMs are flagged and often put in a pool with other URMs in deciding who gets accepted to give the college the diversity they want. Adverse situation are decided in kind while viewing the apps just with everyone else. Big difference.</p>
<p>And it is necessary to do this, because the ugly, ugly truth of the matter is that in many scenarios, if the apps are done on a totally color blind basis, with absolutely NO quarter given for URM status, NONE, you aren’t going to have much diversity at most of the top schools. There is a reason for those NMS categories for AA and hispanic students. Look at how many URMs straight out make the NMS cuts, for example. </p>
<p>And even giving economic and other true hardship situations the leg up, you still are not going to get the numbers for URMs. </p>
<p>Frankly, at UT Austin, they probably do better than most areas in terms of URMs just based on the fact that the 8% quotas are done by schools. Texas needs to get those schools that are heavily URM to get on the stick about getting those kids who are so qualified to apply to UT Austin, and that university needs to come up with money to meet the full needs of those kids if that is a sticking point. It’s horse manure all the way, if they need the AA card simply because they are willing to, say, meet full need for PELL eligible kids who make the 8% quota.</p>