<p>Yeah yeah, group dynamics. The point is that race is so valued for ensuring this group dynamic, at the expense of achievement factors, that to some people it’s obscene. Do these elite schools really need extra blacks or hispanics THAT much more than they need diversity of other kinds (let’s be real, the slack given to URM’s by AA is large)? Not to mention that for most areas of life, race is a special category of its own that is not supposed to be handled directly. For instance, though I try to have a social group with healthy dynamics, I’m not supposed to go, "hey I suppose what I need right now is a Vietnamese friend, yeah. " No, I revise my social group on more substantive bases like interests or personality.</p>
<p>Hey whatever, I can understand most of the motivations for AA. There are some jobs that need it for pragmatic purposes, I think Supreme Court justice is one of those. But for other jobs, I sure hope my surgeon wasn’t chosen by a process affected by AA in any way!</p>
<p>On the whole, I’m not so much against AA as I am ****ed at people like scales1994 who decide to turn a blind eye to what the necessary but unpleasant reality is, but choose to sugar-coat everything until they themselves believe everything is just great in the world.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Explain this. I doubt standards are lowered for URM for race only to be raised somewhere else, or else that wouldn’t really be AA.</p>
<p>URM stats: 1900 SAT, GPA which matches SAT score
Asian/White stats: 2100 SAT, GPA which matches SAT score</p>
<p>URM gets accepted into x college.</p>
<p>The question is whether colleges are trying to educate America as a whole, or whether they are trying to “boost” the ones who have a better ability to make a difference. If it is the former, then affirmative action makes sense. If it is the latter, then it is pointless, because comparing one’s scores with one’s race does not make sense if all colleges want are the brightest students.</p>
<p>I mean that if any given individual is being admitted with below-average scores, generally it means that the same individual is above-average in some other respect (e.g. athletic ability, musical talent, persistence in overcoming obstacles). In some cases it may also mean that the scores are evaluated not only against the entire applicant pool but also against expected performance for students from rural Montana, low income first gens, etc. This balancing of standards affects many admitted students, not just URMs by any means. Again, it affected admissions long before raced-based AA came along. I can imagine some Connecticut banker’s son in the 1890s griping about Yale relaxing its standards by admitting midwestern farm boys and immigrant kids. This is part of the story of how the Ivies evolved from regional finishing schools into national universities.</p>
<p>Ah I see, so in the sentence I quoted you were writing from the perspective that race is just another standard or expectation, interchangeable with SAT or GPA or anything else.</p>
<p>I have to say you seem overly infatuated with these schools and their histories. That’s fine, but I just hope you realize that AA’s opponents are not Connecticut bankers in the 1890s. They’re people in the here and now with their own unique context. Just because something in the past worked to create a nice story doesn’t mean all parallels should be taken for granted as good.</p>
<p>I think that I’m the only white person who likes AA. But I think that if the goal is to bring URMs to a comparable standard as whites, they need to reform it. All of the URMs that I know that made it into top schools were wealthy blacks. So it’s not like they needed to help.
A scale based on socio-economic class would be better.
But if the goal is diversity, i guess they are perfectly legitimate in letting in URMs over similar ORMs or whites. Even if it’s unfair, private schools cam do w/e they want.</p>
<p>Sorry to burst racist bubbles but Ivies aren’t accepting unqualified URMs. It’s a positive factor like legacy (affirmative action for the rich) but there are plenty of well-qualified URMs applying and admitted.</p>
<p>Touche. Lots of people speak of 1800 URMs being admitted over 2400 ORMs. Is this true? Perhaps a 2200 URM is admitted over a 2400 ORM, but at that point they are both really smart, so who cares? It’s holistic.</p>
<p>What about a 2200 ORM being accepted over a 2400 URM?</p>
<p>Being a URM isn’t a huge advantage unless that person comes from a disadvantaged background (family issues, poor area, crappy school) and succeeds in spite of their misfortunes. Let’s be honest, it’s much tougher to be a Valedictorian with a 4.0 in Detroit (where some Vals have 3.4’s because the schools their are so bad) than it is to be a Valedictorian at some nice small suburban high school</p>
<p>^ There is no evidence that a 2400 ORM will become a better surgeon than a 2200 URM.</p>
<p>As a parent of the 2011 HS graduate, I am not thrilled that my S’s race makes his application less appealing to the adcoms. But when he starts college next fall, he and I are happy that it’s going to be a diverse place. </p>
<p>Agree with everyone who stated that private colleges can take w/e they want.</p>
<p>Clearly there is a misunderstanding about URM’s. URM’s aren’t selected randomly. They are accepted by merit. General reliance on SAT scores is silly. Students from poor families with parents who did not attend college are obviously disadvantaged. Most of my classmates were fed literature and given every possible advantage from an early age. A student who grows up in a house with no books and goes out of their way to succeed is an interesting candidate. Yes, they may have 2000 SATs, but SATs mean almost nothing. And frankly, a 2000 SAT with no preparation or support is more impressive to me (and often to admissions) than a 2300 after 2 years of studying and years of reading. </p>
<p>That’s why it’s difficult to be the valedictorian at an inner city school in Detroit. That student is surrounded by other students with no motivation for academics. It’s not that the curriculum is harder. It’s that the students don’t care. The teachers don’t care. The administration doesn’t care. Being the best of that group means that you overcame that, which is very impressive.</p>
<p>It would really depend. For whom should it be easier to get into a college? 2100, 3.7, 1/500, two-sport varsity athlete, URM at North City High School in Detroit, or 2400, 4.0, 1/150, USAMO/Intel/etc, ORM at TJ or Stuy?</p>
<p>If I were an adcom, I’d prefer the kid from Detroit. Not because he is a URM, but because of what he had to overcome and what, in my opinion, he has to offer to the school.</p>