<p>
[quote]
I most definitely do. I have seen Hispanics at my school study their ass off, while working for minimum wage or less to help support the family, to get into college. Meanwhile, the white counterparts who go to the same colleges exhibit a much weaker work ethic and face much less adversity.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just notice that I said used the phrase "any particular Hispanic applicant."</p>
<p>You know what? If a Hispanic student can demonstrate on their application that they worked for minimum wage to support the family, and if they can demonstrate that they overcame poverty, racism, and oppression, then by all means - they deserve extra consideration in the process. If an applicant can prove that they've been disadvantaged, then I'm all for giving them the special consideration.</p>
<p>But I feel that you CANNOT assume that just because someone is Hispanic that they have had to overcome poverty, racism, and oppression. Perhaps it is because I live in a wealthy area that I have seen far too many advantaged Hispanics and African Americans GAME THE SYSTEM. A system that equates skin color with lack of opportunity is inherently flawed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Look at how many whites live below the poverty line and then look at how many Hispanics live below the poverty line. Then complain that the Hispanic gets an "easy ride" because you are too disillusioned by the materialistic dreams that oppressed the Hispanics and other minorities in the first place.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If a Hispanic lives below the poverty line, that needs to be communicated in the application. Applicants to highly selective schools should be evaluated in the context of the opportunities that they have recieved. But again, you are conflating race and opportunity. That's exactly the problem with the system. </p>
<p>When I read the section on minority applicants in A is for Admission, I was absolutely shocked at how wealthy, priviliged minority applicants were admitted with lowered standards. I'm all for giving someone an advantage in the admissions process if they can PROVE that they were disadvantaged. But if there's no evidence to prove that you have been, then you can get in line with the rest of the rich, privilieged white/Asian students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your proposal for economic affirmative action (which I agree with) wouldn't pass because admissions are now <em>need-blind</em>. If we got rid of <em>need-blind</em> admissions, the disadvantaged would not be admitted. On the contrary, the rich, to whom the university does not have to give any financial aid, will be the ones admitted. That is why need-blind admission was implemented in the first place.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Need-blind admissions and socioeconomic considerations of opportunity are NOT mutually exclusive. Need-blind means that students will not be denied admission based on their ability to pay. Need-blind does NOT mean that rich and poor students cannot be evaluated in their respective contexts. If a student has clearly conveyed in the application that they are poor (and the guidance counselor and teacher recommendations are a big part of this), then it should be considered that such a student has had fewer opportunities to do well. Therefore, if such a student has made the most of their opportunities, they should be considered very highly.</p>
<p>Joey</p>