<p>
</p>
<p>Because the immigration system favors skilled workers, it is not surprising that the immigrant-heavy Asian population in the US is heavily biased toward skilled workers with high levels of education.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I will give you the answer of THIS proponent of AA. How about using a reasonable factor of the exact demographics of the country or state? What is reasonable you might ask? How about a bracket of 50 percent above and below the exact demographics. </p>
<p>I am pretty sure that such answer is not what you might think it should be. But in simpler terms, until we reach a closer correlation it will necessary (and justified) to pursue policies that help the under represented groups, and this especially in education. After all, we are a country that has abdicated many choices and pretends to offer a free and comparable education system to all via a system of free K-12. </p>
<p>We can rely on the usual set of excuses to explain the great differences in outcome, or continue to support “thumbs on the scale” until we get to that illusory correlation between education achievement and racial distribution. </p>
<p>We ought to be ashamed of the persistent lack of success.</p>
<p>Some have argued that AA has primarily benefited white women. It provided a wake up call … “Hey, it can’t be all white guys anymore” … without providing support the truly marginalized needed to become competitive with white men. Sure, a few from the “marginalized classes” were admitted to “the club.” But white women made the biggest gains.</p>
<p>The question for America isn’t “AA or no AA” … that’s already been answered. The question surrounds “critical mass.” I have in-laws from the Ross Barnett School of Negro Advancement … “the job’s not done until there are none!” (Interesting intellectual concept … a critical mass of zero.) I think most would agree that it does society no harm to have at least one black kid at UT … even if it means denying admission to a white kid with identical stats.</p>
<p>
Do they say that even with the preference system? Or does it solve the problem?</p>
<p>Yes, “diversity” is vague. Universities can’t put a number on critical mass, but they can define (read: not define) it with the expectation of a fair amount of judicial deference. I’m getting that from Kennedy’s opinion yesterday:
Some of the justices don’t like Grutter. I don’t either, but Fisher didn’t ask the Court to overturn it.</p>
<p>I don’t see how UT or anyone else can justify this kind of program under these standards without actually achieving diversity. So, “critical mass” must be somewhere in between where UT was before and after considering race.</p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>
<p>mini,</p>
<p>Attempts have also been made to make roads for those that are not wealthy.</p>
<p>Many take advantage of these programs. Especially those who have been high performing in their own environments.</p>
<p>Texas Grant for $7,400/yr.
[College</a> For All Texans: TEXAS Grant](<a href=“http://www.collegeforalltexans.com/apps/financialaid/tofa2.cfm?ID=458]College”>College For All Texans: <b>Toward EXcellence, Access, and Success Grant Program (TEXAS Grant)</b>)</p>
<p>Top 10% Scholarship Program for $2,000
[College</a> For All Texans: Top 10% Scholarship Program](<a href=“http://www.collegeforalltexans.com/apps/financialaid/tofa2.cfm?ID=385]College”>College For All Texans:)</p>
<p>Texas Public Educational Grant
[College</a> For All Texans: Texas Public Educational Grant](<a href=“http://www.collegeforalltexans.com/apps/financialaid/tofa2.cfm?ID=406]College”>College For All Texans: Texas Public Educational Grant Program (TPEG))</p>
<p>Those programs are available for any Texas school and do not include University specific financial aid or federal programs.</p>
<p>What preference system? </p>
<p>Remember, a precise number for critical mass sounds too much like a quota. I don’t have the answer, but know we have to think out of the box, without making it downright spacey.</p>
<p>“Diversity” isn’t vague, to me. I meant the framework and constraints under which it has to be managed. All those words and phrases.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So if Asians are 5% of the Texas population, they should not exceed 7.5% = 1.5 * 5% of the UT Austin (or entire UT sytem?) enrollment? Some AA advocates pretend they are not advocating discrimination against Asians, but you are more straightforward.</p>
<p>I’m talking about the way UT uses race in admissions. Does that achieve diversity / critical mass / whatever you call it?</p>
<p>But they cloak their reaction to “race” in the holistic ratings. None of us can exactly say how they react, how it factors, in the end. When someone says preference- and this does include some court talk- I think they assume it is literally “we’ll take as any minorities as we can and then grudgingly look at the rest.” I don’t doubt early AA in the workplace mandated hiring or promoting some minorities or women, regardless. But the colleges are rolling this under holistic. How do you say, unequivocally, that they choose a minority kid based on race?</p>
<p>I wish we could have these discussions without someone claiming discrimination against Asians.</p>
<p>Excuse me, but Fisher is about “what happens at the margins.” Asians aren’t at the margins, or anywhere near the margins for that matter. Abigail Fisher types are at the margins … not good enough to get in as part of an Over-Represented-Majority, and blaming that on the presence of Under-Represented-Minority applicants.</p>
<p>We talked about this earlier. If race is never a decisive factor for any individual, there is no point in having this program.</p>
<p>If “preference” has quota implications I won’t use it anymore.</p>
<p>I’m not asking anyone to directly state where race is decisive. The question is whether the current admissions program - with race considered - is producing a critical mass of minority students for educational diversity purposes. Does UT tell us whether it is?</p>
<p>^ No. (10 Char)</p>
<p>I know a family who lies about their heritage to qualify her kids as “National Hispanic Scholars”. The mom said “well, we’re from Texas so I’m sure there’s some Hispanic blood in there somewhere”.</p>
<p>I’m hopeful that as the races merge this will just all go away. Not in my lifetime, but eventually.</p>
<p>“If race is never a decisive factor for any individual, there is no point in having this program.”</p>
<p>Um, one point to having “check-box race as preference” (though not decisive) is to allow the university to say “we’re trying to increase our URM population, really we are … just look!”</p>
<p>I said consideration, not “preference.”. A consideration- not “never a decisive factor.” And that defining critical mass as a quantitative takes you too close to quota. Not “pref has quota implications.” Big differences.</p>
<p>Xiggi, you are just full of it. Let me say what I think about the “critical mass”. Minorities now hold positions in all 3 branches of government - the presidency, supreme court justice, and congress. In where I live, a town of 80% white and 20% minorities, we have a black mayor. We also have a black governor in a state where 85% are white. There are numerous successful minorities in business, entertainment, sports…etc. etc. Another shifting trend is the interracial marriage. You can’t even well define what a minority is pretty soon. Does 1/8 of minority provide more “diversity” than 1/16? Where do you stop? Furthermore, the census data shows that the whole country will become a majority minority by 2043, or even sooner given the immigration policy the U.S. is adopting. </p>
<p>AA is a policy that makes sense when black and white can’t even ride the same bus. And the proponents of it, someone like you, are very oblivious to the fact of the AA’s harmful and unwanted consequences to other races who are discriminated against because of AA. Your moral standards are very selective to one group and one race. It’s unfortunate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First of all, I will ask you to tone down your language, and check the TOS rules for courtesy. </p>
<p>Then, I will point that you asked about critical mass , and offered you an honest answer about it if he or she were to use the demographics of the country of the state. I also predicted that you would not like it, and for obvious reasons. </p>
<p>If you want an intelligent dialogue, I would suggest to be more courteous and perhaps understand that people might have very different views from your own. And that despite the differences in opinions, both deserve respect.</p>
<p>xiggi, I guess you just like to spin and do the side shows without much substance. I don’t consider this is a legit debate as you didn’t have valid points. I also predicted that you would not like it for the same obvious reasons.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bel, one might disagree with a position that intimates that a sub-group that is over-represented by more than fifity percent is also a victim of discrimination. Also, you wondered about the impact of AA on other minorities. Would it be farfetched to accept that the path from URM to ORM starts with a serious thumb of AA for the group that has become the model minority. Even the most vocal AA foes have recognized that AA and the ancillary diversity targets did help women and … Asians in a not so-distant past.</p>
<p>“until we get to that illusory correlation between education achievement and racial distribution.” </p>
<p>I wonder what kind of correlation this is? If one racial group works hard and focuses more on education, why must the distribution be the same as population? </p>
<p>Why stop in education? What about sports? Where is the diversity in NBA? As far as I know, there is only one Asian guy. Where is the correlation of “achievement and racial distribution” in NBA? I suppose we are all very “intelligent” to recognize the natural ability when it comes to sports but not intellects or work ethics.</p>