<p>The following data comes from The Education trust (<a href="http://www.collegeresults.org%5B/url%5D">www.collegeresults.org</a>); this webite was brought to my attention by one of my teachers. It is quite interesting.</p>
<p>Here are the stats for Georgetown University:</p>
<p>Graduation rate in:
4 years --> 89.5%
5 years --> 92.5%
6 years --> 93%</p>
<p>In 2003:</p>
<p>92.8% of males graduated within six years
93.3% of females graduated within six years
94.5% of "Whites" graduated within six years
94.2% of Asians graduated within six years
91.1% of Latinos graduated within six years
82% of African Americans graduated within six years</p>
<p>The site also does other breakdowns, including SAT, financial assistance, etc.</p>
<p>Yet I wonder how reliable these stats are.</p>
<p>I don't think that they're very reliable, becuase when I visted Georgetown and did an info. session, I asked what percent of students graduate within 4 years. They didn't have that answer, but they said that somewhere around 96% graduate within 5.</p>
<p>what i find most interesting about that site is that some of the biggest proponents of affirmative action (Ann Arbor, Berkeley) have the biggest disparities between white graduation rate and minority graduation rate.</p>
<p>The data comes from 2003 so I expect it to be outdated, but interesting nonetheless.</p>
<p>Interesting Babybird87.</p>
<p>But when it comes to affirmative action, the UC Regents set the general policy. Refer to the U.S. Supreme Court case Bakely v. University of California Regent; if I remember correctly, that's the title of the case. The individual UC admissions then decide specific requirements but UC Regents usually provides the skeleton (including affirmative action). However, a California Proposition passed terminating affirmative action. Furthermore, UC's not longer follow affirmative action (in terms of meeting quotas) but practice it by including it as a "factor" of "hardship." UC calls this "life challenges."</p>
<p>Of course, the more recent case was with UMich, Ann Arbor Undergrad and Law School</p>
<p>it's Bakke vs University of California Regents, but you're right</p>
<p>unfortunately, despite Prop 209 barring affirmative action in CA, this only means that the student's ethnicity is blacked out on the application. many schools, including Berkely, now have a "diversity essay" that is specifically designed to allow minorities to tell them they are minorities. and they still consider minority to be a plus for admission. so Prop 209 was honorable in goal, but flawed in execution.</p>
<p>It was thwarted by then-Governor Gray Davis and the present Governor is unlikely to do anything.</p>
<p>Yes, on the UC App, the third question is an open questions to asks students to talk about life challenges, what distinguishes you from others, etc. </p>
<p>It doesn't encourage students to say their minorities per se, but applicants get overdramatic with their hardships. </p>
<p>One of UCLA's clubs ran a little stunt. They sold cookies; White and Asian males had to pay more for the same cookie; White and Asian females were next, then African American, Latinos, Native Americans, etc. males and females the lowest. This upset the Black Student Union.</p>
<p>
[quote]
what i find most interesting about that site is that some of the biggest proponents of affirmative action (Ann Arbor, Berkeley) have the biggest disparities between white graduation rate and minority graduation rate.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But it makes sense because AA basically lowers standards for URMs, and when they enroll, they're left on their own, and since technically they weren't as qualified/talented/hardworking as white counterparts, they tend to graduate in a longer time.</p>
<p>right, I've long used that argument in debates and such, but it's really interesting to see it right there in black and white statistics (no pun intended).</p>
<p>whereas Asians, the "overrepresented" minority, graduate with a comparable or better rate than whites usually. </p>
<p>it's hard to see how one can look at these stats and still pretend they're not lowering the ceiling at universities by allowing affirmative action.</p>
<p>They definitely have different criteria for different people, be it different races, location, athletes, legacies...</p>
<p>"One of UCLA's clubs ran a little stunt. They sold cookies; White and Asian males had to pay more for the same cookie; White and Asian females were next, then African American, Latinos, Native Americans, etc. males and females the lowest. This upset the Black Student Union."</p>
<p>by far, my favorite story of last year. These "conservative bakesales" went on across the whole country (i contemplated doing one here). Violence even broke out against some of the sellers. I found it terrifying the amount of backlash provoked simply by the creation of a microcosm of affirmative action.</p>
<p>lol, that's pretty awesome though. I think it illustrates a good point though-- a lot of people who support AA get angry when people "help" them because they take it offensively.</p>
<p>The question is why Asians are "overrepresented" and why Asians are more likely to attend college than other minorities. In the end, I would argue that it comes down to cultural values. As a Chinese American, my parents have always emphasized getting an education, despite the fact that my mom never finished high school. Though I'm certainly not suggesting an superiority whatsoever, I do believe that the set of values parents hand down to their children greatly affects a person's want to go to college.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the people you hang out with also factors in to going to college; it turns out that a student who hangs out with other students who want to go to college are more likely to attend than those who don't.</p>
<p>yeah, it was also whites who backlashed against the conservatives.</p>
<p>when affirmative action is put like that, in terms of $1 per cookie for whites and 50 cents for minorities, it's so easy to see the bias that it's no surprise (sad, but no surprise) when liberals get ****ed.</p>
<p>eiffelguy-- agree. but i think it's pretty weird how they reward African Americans for slavery, and not Asians for the terrible human rights violations committed against them. and also Russians for Communism. and Jews for the Holocaust. it could go on and on. </p>
<p>why not give everyone AA?</p>
<p>I think the reason I personally work very hard (I'm asian) is because I lived in China for a couple of years and the mindset was just engraved in me. If you don't work hard, even in 1st grade, well you're jeopardizing college and life in general.</p>
<p>Exactly babybird...in the end, a fair assessment means that everybody gets AA.</p>
<p>The Japanese were placed in internment camps that were less than stellar...give them AA. Irish American suffered greatly in the early years...give them AA. Eastern Europeans who immigrated in the 1800s were also discriminated; just read the Sinclair's muckraker novel The Jungle and find out...heck give them AA too. In the end, let's just give free hand outs to everybody!</p>
<p>Yet, I don't think the U.S. government has ever officially apologized for the enslavement of African Americans or at least try to get something going after the Civil War. It wasn't until the 1960s that African Americans truly had rights (though some would argue that even today they don't have any).</p>
<p>I wouldn't say they don't have any, that's very extreme, but I've heard that from people....shrug. everyone loves a conspiracy.</p>
<p>the govt has apologized for slavery, at different points...i specifically remember Bush doing it in Africa. we know it's bad. we've faced our past. that doesn't mean we need to start discriminating all over again, this time against whites and Asians. </p>
<p>by the way, The Jungle is a sick, sick novel.</p>
<p>Hahaha...the funny part is that no more than 30 pages describes the conditions of the meat packing industry, yet readers find that the most promenient thing.</p>
<p>Now I know that the U.S. govn't has apologized.</p>
<p>They're definitely still discriminated against and in a way, they will never enjoy the same freedoms as white people. </p>
<p>I don't know how I got into an AA debate, but I'm glad we're only covering one side now. I don't think I could handle it if someone came in here and started arguing with us. </p>
<p>But in the end, I think a person's opinion of AA is of course affected by their own race, and what benefit/harm AA does for them.</p>
<p>Yeah...AA comes down to one's own experiences.</p>
<p>Well East Coast is midnight by now so I doubt anyone is going to join in.</p>
<p>In fact, shouldn't you New Yorker's be asleep?</p>