<p>QNYergrl, i totally understand what you're saying but I think part of the race consideration is that TYPICALLY minorities tend to fall into the low socioeconomic scale, although it isnt necessarily the case for many.. Where i live, many hispanics tend to drop out of high school and girls end up pregnant, so for me to go to college is an achievement unlike any other and thats why I believe Affirmative action is helpful for those who are under the same situation.</p>
<p>Well, having met and worked with top university administrators on the issue, including President Coleman, along with having met and discussed the issue with Jennifer Gratz, Barbara Grutter, Terrance Pell (the chief litigator in the 2 affirmative action cases) and Prof. Carl Cohen, the man who instigated MCRI in the 1st place, I'm telling you there are some factual misunderstandings in your argument, espcially in how affirmative action is used.</p>
<p>Sorry for the name-dropping, but...umm...I'm kind of a big deal. lol</p>
<p>KB</p>
<p>(I'm not going to go point by point through your argument, but just keep yourself open to learning A LOT more about the issue when you get here).</p>
<p>kb, was that referred to me or cc?</p>
<p>To all...........</p>
<p>Yes, minorities make up a significant part of the lower income bracket. With a system based solely on socioeconomic factors, anyone that fits in these low income brackets will be helped. That way, race is all together avoided and there is no discrimination. </p>
<p>And, race is an extremely important factor in any college admissions process, including the University of Michigan. Over the past few years, there has been a huge increase in not only the number but also the quality of URM applicants. Blacks, Hispanics, and other URM's cannot rely soley on their race anymore because college admissions is becoming increasingly more competitive for everyone, including URM's. You weren't deferred because Michigan is focusing less on race; rather, you were deferred because you are, simply to say, not a strong enough applicant to be admitted at first glance.</p>
<p>And, not to sound pretentious, but I cannot find a single flaw in my ideology. </p>
<p>Affirmative Action based on socioeconomic factors = aid given to those in need, regardless of race = level, fair playing field = no discrimination</p>
<p>Although I believe this is a good formula for success, I do believe diversity is important for a school.</p>
<p>I don't want people to believe I am a racist pig. I just feel that our current system is flawed and could be altered.</p>
<p>lol, i could see something wrong with your Ideology. This is my theory and this is what I think KB might be thinking. To start off, Affirmative action could have a greater benefit to society in the sense that these minorities will get a "boost" in education. If Affirmative action is solely based on socioeconomic status, those who were less well educated due to economic reasons, will not be able to stay @ a competitive school, such as Michigan, because of its hard classes and because they dont have enough knowledge to help them stay in these schools. If its based on race, the school could benefit by having diversity. Now, i understand your argument about the wealthy african american. But, perhaps this wealthy black person possesses something one doesnt know about thats mentioned in the essay. Perhaps he lived in africa for half of his life? or perhaps he visits nigeria or something? and could give the school the "diversity" factor it wants. Furthermore, by giving these kids affirmative action, it could help out the community that these minorities, who are often considered by society to be "dumb" or "illiterate" (currently, hispanics are experiencing this) a chance to stabalize themselves and get a decent job. In minority perspective, caucasians normally could get better jobs even if they are of middle class or lower middle class, since they are not considered to be as "dumb" as minority applicants. Most schools prefer race over socioeconomic status, because they gain diversity and to put it in a simple way, socioeconomic status isnt exactly "diverse" enough. Diversity is not just money, but its cultures, religions, beliefs, etc. I also think that by affirmative action, it may help promote ethnocentrism in a good way, similar to that of Martin Luther King and Cesar Chavez, where the well educated minorities, help the less educated ones. ok im done :)</p>
<p>Wow, I guess none of you listened to me.lol. Well, I'm poor and hispanic so I guess benefit everywhere.:). Anywho, QNYgurl, yeah um maybe your chinese friends were rejected because the admissions counselors didn't like their essays or something of that matter? Its funny how when a qualified non urm is rejected from a school that has an acceptance rate less than 15% but then a "less" qualified hispanic gets in, they scream AFFIRMATIVE ACTION! Yes, there are some flaws in AA but there are also a lot pros. Oh yeah CC, my income bracket is less than 10,000 and I still have to contribute money AND my financial aid package included loans.</p>
<p>Affirmative Action in terms of college admissions is a completely separate issue from financial aid. </p>
<p>In college admissions, I believe that anyone in the low income bracket, regardless of race, should reap the benefits (more lenient admission standards) of AA. This has nothing to do with financial aid.</p>
<p>And, what QNYgirl said is true. Asians are an over-represented minority in many of the top colleges (which, so happens to be where most asians apply). In general, Asians tend to maintain a strong work ethic and tend to be in the top of their classes. Therefore, they are held to much more competitive admissions standards. In effect, Affirmative Action works against Asians, even though they make up a miniscule percentage of universities nationwide.</p>
<p>Certainly, it is not right to scream Affirmative Action when a Black or Hispanic person is accepted into a highly selective college with low grades, SAT's, etc. But, we cannot ignore the fact that their race played an integral role in the admissions process and more often than not helped the student gain admission, when their grades or SAT's couldn't make the cut. Of course this isn't always true.</p>
<p>What I meant is what she was saying about hispanics who had lower gpas but the same sat score as the asian students had(thats why I had quotes for less). You can't scream AA as the only excuse for your bad luck when there is such a small difference.</p>
<p>In most cases, the college will choose the URM over the generic white or asian kid, even if they are completely identical in terms of SAT's, grades, etc. Affirmative Action, more specifically, the desire for diversity at the cost of compromising the intellectual integrity of the school, is the reason for this discrimination.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What I meant is what she was saying about hispanics who had lower gpas but the same sat score as the asian students had(thats why I had quotes for less). You can't scream AA as the only excuse for your bad luck when there is such a small difference.
[/quote]
Outofstateorbust, I agree with CCrunner's idea of reformed affirmative action and someone in your economic background would benefit from such a system, regardless of your race. You're right about me not being aware of all of the X-factors that led to certain colleges acceptances, like essays and such, but you have to acknowledge that the way affirmative action works now allows for a less qualified URM to be accepted over one who isn't. You also said there was such a small difference in the GPA, but when the ONLY students excepted with GPA's below a certain number are URM's, it's obviously it's because of AA. What I was arguing about was that our government, something or someone, must try to improve neighborhoods with many minorities in terms of the school systems and create a culture that values education, but I know this is probably idealistic. It seems as if the younger generations (including my sister's, who is only 4 years younger than me) of all races aren't valuing education as they should and as we need to continue an educated American populous. You could be Latino or Asian, but if you come from a low-income family, chances are your parents and maybe even you may have to choose immediate work over education just to live paycheck to paycheck.</p>
<p>I agree with you, but as I mentioned, if its solely based on socioeconomic statuses those who were unable to acquire knowledge due to economic reasons for college will not be able to help the school in their retention levels, as those students will eventually drop out. I dont believe affirmative action outweighs the GPA, although surely there may be applicants with a lower SAT, but perhaps their essays make up for that...</p>
<p>What you just said doesn't make much sense. Why would an affirmative action system based on socioeconomic factors contribute anymore to lower retention levels than a system based solely on race? If a system based on such factors as income, type of school, etc. was used, any poor student, regardless of race, would receive help in their educational pursuits.</p>
<p>No, my school didnt have any college counselors lol...so i dont know what your talking about.... we had to figure everything out ourselves...</p>
<p>This is what KB meant to being open minded, not everyone is going to be lavished with knowledge about college like some white kids in middle america. If they were to have some rich black person like u said, obviously, he has a less chance of dropping out than someone who is not as knowledgeable since according to you, affirmative action is done by GPAs way lower than the average.</p>
<p>In most cases, the college will choose the URM over the generic white or asian kid, even if they are completely identical in terms of SAT's, grades, etc. Affirmative Action, more specifically, the desire for diversity at the cost of compromising the intellectual integrity of the school, is the reason for this discrimination.</p>
<p>You really didn't prove a point. If they are identical then why is it that the hispanic student was soley chosen based on race. There are MANY different factors that play in the college admissions. As kb said, there are many misconceptions that we all have and we don't exactly know how its used in the college admissions process. And for private institutions, its really not unconstitutional to practice AA just as it is to have the daughters of liberty scholarship fund(its basically a kkk scholarship for girls) or having a religiously affiliated school.</p>
<p>PS Are you a college admissions counselor? Because you seem confident in your asumptions.</p>
<p>Think outside the box on the issue. Its an issue of supply and demand...that simple.</p>
<p>I kind of have an idea of what your trying to say kb but I don't want to jump to conclusions and sound stupid. So, could you elaborate on waht you mean?</p>
<p>i dont know, maybe its the more diversity = the more applicants they'll receive ? lol</p>
<p>I guess kb means by supply and demand that there's an overstock of non-URM's, so it's harder to sell them to the university. There aren't as many URM's who qualify academically (no offense meant) for top tier schools as non-URM's, so the demand for them goes up.</p>