I Hate Myself For Being An Arm Chair Liberal

Parents Forum
181

<p>in our district I see education becoming even more segregated and ironically it seems to be pushed that way by the AA community.( not necessarily a large section- but the ones who are vocal and who go to meetings)</p>

<p>Currently a huge push to offer more vocational classes in a response to students who arent passing their academic classes is growing.
THese classes will train students for entrance into the "high paying" world of building and construction or cosmetology ( note- sarcasm)- instead of finding why and where they need academic support so that they can succeed in their academic classes.
I have nothing against working with your hands- my husband has never attended college and he is very intelligent and hard working- but I thought we fought to do away with segregated education.
Why aren't more parents encouraging their students to take more challenging courses- the opportunity is there. I know- my daughter who was in special education just a couple years ago is now taking AP courses- she isn't getting As, but there is support for students to prepare for college or at least have their high school transcript be as meaningful as the next students
I counsel students, often low income AA students who don't realize until senior year that they are interested in attending college- while it isn't out of reach even then- it will entail more from them financially, than if they took college prep courses in high school.
I understand that AA parents and all parents want their kids to be able to make a contribution and to find work, but so many of these kids have parents who frankly are steering them into occupations, even while they are in high school, rather than making sure their high school education isn't shutting doors on them</p>

182

<p>Okay calmom:</p>

<p>I have thought very hard about your post. And to tell you the truth, I can’t really get around most of it.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm the parent of a white, Jewish girl who doesn't test well. She's also very independent-spirited and didn't follow the prescribed academic path through high school. She's a dynamo though, and writes well - and she has just been admitted to Barnard, U. of Chicago, NYU & Berkeley. If you look at the numbers, though - you'd wonder why she got in <em>over</em> all of the kids with much higher test scores and stronger academic records.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You have just confirmed my growing suspicion that we are being had by numbers driven folks and ETS. I think the admissions officers are just a few steps ahead of most of us. Numbers are probably important to them, but only as a massive filter of students. That is probably how a committee of only about 40 people can get through 20,000 applications in only a few months. If an application comes by them with just that special quirkiness to catch their attention, then it probably doesn’t matter to them what numbers say. The applicant has demonstrated that she has the spark that makes this world worth living in. So, I am over here giving the nod of respect to your daughter, to you and to you entire and obviously cool family. That girl of yours truly did earn her spot, just as much as any 2400 scorer on the SAT.</p>

<p>This also confirms what I have long preached since I have had kids. We as parents have been given precious things in our children. Every child (and I mean EVERY SINGLE KID, no matter WHAT their condition) has some special gift that if only we would care and nurture, would make this world a little bit more special. We do our children a grave disservice when we seek to reduce them just to some collegeboard score. That is why we see so many kids here in despair when they bomb these tests. They are feeling themselves reduced to a score, and when they don’t measure up, they feel worthless. Smacking the SAT is a game for us, like riding a bike. I am actually working in my neighborhood so that we can get the entire community playing this game. We think that any normal person can smack this test just as any normal person can ride a bike. But if we do have a kid who simply can’t ride a bike or smack the test, that kid will know we appreciate him for what is important.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If my daughter were black or hispanic, everyone would lump her into that AA category. This is not the fault of AA -- this really just comes from the internal prejudices of the people throwing out the label. In other words, because my daughter isn't a minority, and she isn't an athlete, and we are not rich and she is not a legacy -- she doesn't fit any sort easy category to provide an excuse for her incongruous rise above the competition. So instead she is now branded an anomaly -- the "exception that proves the rule" -- that is, since she represents an instance of something that never happens, then it can only have happened to her by some sort of odd accident or happenstance, and the report must be discarded. Cognitive dissonance.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I really can’t get around anything you’ve said here. I have tried, Lord knows. But I sincerely can’t reject this.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The reason you need AA is that you could be the parent of a girl like my daughter (with 8 kids, you probably are). My d. is the one who was voted "most likely to succeed" in her 8th grade class -- she is just a kid with a lot of confidence, poise & guts. She's got brains, but it is the personality that wows people. But because of the color of your skin, if you have a child who has the same kind of personal dynamism and charisma -- but not the "stats" -- every success will get chalked up to "affirmative action".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, that is so painfully true. I have tried all night and most of this morning to find some way to reject this. But I just can’t. But, one thing I think minority kids should tell whites and Asians who whine when they get in with lower numbers (AND I MEAN THIS!) is something like this:</p>

<p>“Well, it is obvious that what you have in numbers, you lack in personality, dynamism and passion. I have all this in addition to numbers that are at least respectable. So I’m in – and you’re not. Now you’ll just have to get over it.”</p>

<p>I think it is time to realize that our kids are very complex and that we owe it to them to see ALL of what they bring to the table.</p>

<p>Son has a BIG BIG interview in an hour. You praying folks, please pray to your respective deities for him. The rest of you, please hope for him or do for him what is important to you.</p>

<p>-D</p>

183

<p>"Northstarmom would be better able than I am to address the SAT scores of URM's, but I'll say that in general you may be off in your assumptions. "</p>

<p>Epiphany,</p>

<p>Huh? What leads you to that belief? Have you even bothered to read the U of M case, or at least a good synopsis of it?</p>

<p>I would love to continue this discussion with you since you are so committed to your opinions and represent them so well, but they continue to be that - unsubstantiated opinions.</p>

<p>You seem to want to treat the facts as mere impediments which can be brushed aside on your way to stating your firmly held opinions. Your pronouncements on correlations between college admissions and parental support/wealth are interesting and reasonable but, again, totally unsubstantiated. Maybe it's a right brain/left brain thing, but if you have actual data I would love to be educated by it.</p>

<p>I can tell you that in the U of M scoring systems, no points were given for parental support of parental wealth, but they were for URM status. That is factual.</p>

184

<p>SBdad,</p>

<p>Your son got an accomodation, and extra time to take his SATs, which contributed to his scores. Do you think that it should be indicated on the score report. What would his score been without this accomodation? There are those that think that if students are going to get extra time that everyone should get extra time.</p>

<p>Do you think that any student that get accomodations, kids that take expensive prep courses, should also have that indicated it on thier score report? There are those that believe that the SAT has turned in to an instrument that measures how well you have been prepped.</p>

<p>Drosselmeier wrote about his daughter and you totally marginalized what he had to say. My daughter comes from a single parent household, spent the majority of her life growing up in the hood, is not a legacy, developmental admit, nor attended an expensive prep course, we are by no stretch of the imagination wealthy, and got similar scores to his daughter (stronger ones than your son is presenting but you will be upset if he does not get admitted into an ivy). But then you will marginalize that also despite that fact that after almost being at her Ivy for 2 years her grades are either at or exceed the average grade (her school posts the average grade for each course) but you will probably say , she picked easy classes, or getting a pass because she is black.</p>

<p>There is a student who was just admitted to the following schools and does not know which school to choose:</p>

<p>HARVARD, PRINCETON, YALE, PENN, STANFORD, COLUMBIA, DARTMOUTH, CORNELL, BROWN, RICE, UT and Stanford.</p>

<p>his scores are: 2240 (710 CR, 770 M, 760 W)</p>

<p>Do you think that he is displaced a high scoring non-URM with better stats? (but I am quite sure that you would find is case also to be an exception to the rules)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Epiphany,</p>

<p>Huh? What leads you to that belief? Have you even bothered to read the U of M case, or at least a good synopsis of it?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>SBdad,</p>

<p>You keep throwing out this statement. Have you read the amicus brief submitted by Harvard University, Brown University, the University of Chicago, Dartmouth College, Duke University, the University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, and Yale University in support of the University of Michigan?</p>

<p>Have you read the supreme courts decision regarding the whole case?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Simba,
What a kernel of truth! It applies to everybody in all kinds of situations, and it bears repeating:</p>

<p>lkf725 </p>

<p>Quote:
But, I still believe for one to move on they have to conquer their internal conflicts. If you keep playing the past events as a never ending tape, you would never be free. You would be in prison of your own thoughts for ever

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When your kid or other relative gets stopped while driving for no other reason but the color of his skin, when hispanic and black kids walk across campus and people stop assuming that they are there on an AA admit, When black pen are no longer tied to the back of trucks in Texas, When a situation happens like the one down at Duke and is dividing the community, because the victim must be lying, then I'll get over it.</p>

185

<p>*Your son got an accomodation, and extra time to take his SATs, which contributed to his scores. Do you think that it should be indicated on the score report. What would his score been without this accomodation? There are those that think that if students are going to get extra time that everyone should get extra time.</p>

<p>Do you think that any student that get accomodations, kids that take expensive prep courses, should also have that indicated it on thier score report? There are those that believe that the SAT has turned in to an instrument that measures how well you have been prepped.*</p>

<p>Not me but I will answer
I think those with accomodations should be noted on tests- but I also am irritatted that the SAT I has been extended- and think it should be a shorter test over more days for everyone.
I don't necessarily think that prep courses need to be noted- but I imagine that a certain income would alert colleges to the fact that a course may have been utilitized</p>

<p>I don't feel that for many students- a test is an adequate indication of how they will do in school
For example, my older daughter- likes to take tests- and she isn't fazed by a test that would last all day- even though she did qualify for accomodations because of her LDs.
She attends a college that is extremely rigorous, and where even with the extended time- she didn't score as well as some classmates ( because of her math score), but she is still hanging in there- and will graduate barring unforseen events in about a month & a 1/2
It is probable however that had she studied for the test- didn't have a math disabilty or even had taken a sat prep course that she would have scored much higher- but we didn't see the need for it at the time- and her school places emphasis on other parts of the application- not just grades or test scores</p>

<p>I see universities going away from scores- and trying to get a fuller picture of the student and of what they may acheive in college- which I think is a good thing</p>

186

<p>Sybbie, </p>

<p>I feel bad that your bitterness and anger is so close to the surface that you feel a need to personally attack me, even when I have continued to state that I support admission preferences for URM's. I was merely trying to have a civil discussion regarding an important issue that was based on fact. I see now that this is such a divisive issue that a civil discussion it is not possible.</p>

<p>I don't really wish to stay in this thread any longer and be misrepresented or upset others when that was the farthest thing from my mind when I started it. Before I depart, however, I want to respond to your many misrepresentations. If I am wrong in any of these, please quote me from previous threads.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Yes, my son did get an accommodation for his documented condition. My stance on this is consistent with my support for preferences for URM's in admission. If there are to be tests, they should do their best to measure aptitude and the experts that prepare these tests have obviously felt that accommodations need to be made in certain circumstances to appropriately measure aptitude. I think I would be doing my S a real disservice by not availing him of this accommodation.</p></li>
<li><p>You say I "marginalized" Drosselmeier's post. The following is my post:</p></li>
</ol>

<p>"Drosselmeir,</p>

<p>It is no wonder your D has achieved in the manner she has with the wonderful example you have set. Many congratulations!</p>

<p>I have a question. You say:</p>

<p>" In a sea of high scoring whites and asians, someone took a look at my little black daughter and was impressed by all those 800s and all that genuine community service and all that passion and love and heart and soul and might that would surely have gone unnoticed had there been no AA."</p>

<p>Why do you think it would have gone unnoticed? Your D has demonstrated remarkable achievement by any standard."</p>

<p>I sincerely don't see that as any thing but congratulatory and complimentary. </p>

<ol>
<li> With regard to your obviously outstanding daughter, you said:</li>
</ol>

<p>"But then you will marginalize that also despite that fact that after almost being at her Ivy for 2 years her grades are either at or exceed the average grade (her school posts the average grade for each course) but you will probably say, she picked easy classes, or getting a pass because she is black."</p>

<p>I never said, inferred or even thought anything like that. Where do you get that? Why would you presuppose my thoughts and stereotype me? I am nothing but thrilled for you daughter, happy that the she is successful and so obviously loved by her devoted mother.</p>

<ol>
<li>"...stronger ones (SAT scores) than your son is presenting but you will be upset if he does not get admitted into an ivy.."</li>
</ol>

<p>And when did I ever say that he wanted to get into an ivy, or that I wanted him to? But thanks for insulting me any way, even though I have been nothing but civil throughout.</p>

<ol>
<li> Yes, I have read the amicus brief and I do agree with the thrust of their arguments. What you will not find in those briefs is any references to the actual scoring systems that any of those institutions use for admissions. The only scoring system divulged in the case is that of U of M, and therefore, that is the one I refer to.</li>
</ol>

<p>Sybbie, again I am sorry for your obvious bitterness and vitriol. As someone who generally supports your view with regard to URM's, I can't imagine what it feels like to be actually opposed to your views. I would only ask that you stop misrepresenting me and presupposing my thoughts and opinions. I would not do that to you.</p>

187

<p>I have no bitterness nor vitriolic hatred toward you and you have no need to feel sorry for me. Why I obviously bitter, because I brought the issue back full circle back to your front door (in yes, let's talk about your kid) since you started this this thread talking about who you would feel about your kid.</p>

<p>While you state that you support admissions preferences, but you also stated that </p>

<p>
[quote]
I just can't help feeling a twinge of something negative (anger, resentment, jealousy?) when I read about a UM who was just admited to an IVY with stats which are materially lower than non UM's in the RD round (SAT < 2000).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why would you feel the need to be angry, resentful of jealous of someone else who also brought their A game to the table?</p>

<p>You said:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Maybe you would care to explain why you made the connection between low IQ, felons and URM's.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Should I not be offended by this statement, as it is not the experience of any one in my family.</p>

<p>Poet'sheart made a statement in which you responded:</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think that nycdad's post is heartwarming and I am genuinely pleased not only that his child was admitted, but that his child deserved to be admitted and was admitted. That being said, the story is purely anecdotal. There seems to be a general denial of the facts that, statistically, URM's are admitted to selective schools with lower gpa's and standardized test scores that non-URM's. If you don't accept that as a premise, then your entire argument is disingenuous at best. All these discussions about athletes, artists, legacies, etc are smoke screens. I was trying to have a legitimate discussion about the merits of admitting URM's on a preferential basis, and here's what I can't seem to get across

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you not think your comments have not marginalized what others have had to say.</p>

<p>When the statistical data was presented and it was not the data you wanted to see, you made no comment about it. I personally would love to see some statistical data on how much of a boost does getting extra time or extensive prep give a student in terms of scores. Maybe things just need to be said in terms that you can understand. As you paint with URMs with such broad stokes, on a public forum, you tend to forget that you are bringing other people's kids into those strokes.</p>

<p>You were the one who started the conversation about how you would feel if things affected your kid (you opened that door, I am walking through it and testing for understanding). As a parent, I think that I just put out there a question that people are asking in the back of their minds, so it we have an exchange about issues, why not look at all of them. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And when did I ever say that he wanted to get into an ivy, or that I wanted him to?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Did you not start a thread Ivy Fit for Quirky Son</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=151276&page=1&pp=15%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=151276&page=1&pp=15&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Once again did this whole thread not start with the words..</p>

<p>can't help feeling a twinge of something negative (anger, resentment, jealousy?) when I read about a UM who was just admited to an IVY with stats which are materially lower than non UM's in the RD round (SAT < 2000).</p>

<p>But after all has been said and done folks will go on hating the players instead of hating the game.</p>

188

<p>I think it is only a game for those who choose to play
there are still lots of schools for any student- and while it does take some looking sometimes and we may have to let go of preconcieved ideas about what our child" deserves"- I think that the students on these boards will do well and find a school that works for them</p>

189

<p>I still stand by my support of simba's statement that one has to move forward in a proactive way rather than imprison themselves by dwelling on the past. You can apply this historically or individually. Those who want to hang on to bitterness over past societal injustices probably would be among the first to advise a student rejected from their first choice college to get move on and to be happy and successful. In adult careers, people who are the most successful are usually those who are the most resilient and forward-thinking, rather than those who remain bitter over past injustices. Apply the same thinking to personal relationships and it still holds true.</p>

<p>Simba is right...it is just healthier to move into the future than to live in the past. :)</p>

190

<p>
[quote]
still stand by my support of simba's statement that one has to move forward in a proactive way rather than imprison themselves by dwelling on the past.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It is not about dwelling on the past, becasue now in 2006 some these same issues still exist .</p>

191

<p>However- I do agree that for teh big universities who mainly go on stats and scores it can be very difficult to be admitted.
Our state university has raised the automatic acceptance bar very, very high and many do not realize that.
FOr example AA parents even with college background, don't realize that it is more difficult to get in, and some are not encouraging their students to take challenging classes, thinking that decent grades and a high school diploma is enough.
Friday night at a community forum a ( white)parent expressed concerns that making 20% of the high school budget for vocational classes is going to force cutbacks in academics ( this is at the most academic public high school in the city- if not the state) and will limit student opportunities at a school where 90% of students say they want to go to college( this is an inner city school)- this is a valid concern at a time when it is more difficult to get into college- and when many students and their families may expect to attend the local U.
But she was attacked by a "black" community member who argued that when he went to university- he didn't have good grades or Ap classes and he got in. That AA students didn't need to have college prep classes.
Now he didn't have kids and so probably isn't aware that yes- things * have* changed, but it is frustrating when we want to help improve high school education for all students, and for all students to have doors open to them when they graduate but when the parents who are often involved are white- they are seen as only being concerned for "their" kids and not all students-
Luckily our principal also feels that the bar for AA students should be as high for anyone else, and that if need be- resources will be made available to help them reach that bar- rather than steer them off to a non academic path.
But it is causing conflicts in the community, because students aren't allowed to slide as in the past-. It isn't doing anyone any favors if all they have to do to get a diploma is meet a minimum standard of seat time. These kids are not stupid- they can do the work- but it has to be seen as a value-</p>

192

<p>Wasn't the point system used by Michigan, indeed, virtually the entired methodology it used to assess URM applicants deemed unconstitutional by the courts, SBdad? You keep waving the Michigan flag, as if their AA methodologies are the current standard and practice across the land. For the sake of defending a single, unassailable point of view, I guess Michigan would be the convenient forward guard to send into battle. But the various schools assess minority applicants by differing methodologies.</p>

<p>And the truth is that this whole issue is messy and complex and FULL OF VARIABLES (a lot like the continuing drama known as Race Relations in the United States). There are no monolithic cardboard cut-outs standing in for the players in this drama, but individual human beings of all backgrounds and colors. Each of them has a set of circumstances particular to himself, and each is intensely and understandably invested in his own college admissions outcome. When the whole argument is distilled down to raw numbers, it negates every other circumstance that may matter when it comes to who is admitted and who is not (and I'm NOT refering to mere ethnicity or skin color!) The fact is, if not a single minority applied to these schools, and therefore did not factor into any admission decision, as was the case only a short while ago, there would still be wide disparity between the stats of some applicants and those of the admitted mean within any given class. There would still be kids (boys only, in the case of the Ivys) whose SATs were disparate by more than 200 pts., both above and below the norm, and whose GPAs varied just as much. But because all these applicants were of the accepted race and class, it was never a point of national outrage. </p>

<p>White applicants are allowed wiggle room, and fronted migitating variables that no minority applicant can lay claim to. What I mean by this is that, if a white applicant is Learning disabled, has a physical or medical incapacity, or any other compelling circumstance that might mitigate his test scores and GPA, nobody brands him as having been unfairly admitted as part of a monolithic, universally "under-qualified" minority group. If an equally capable minority applicant presents with the same mitigating variables, his scores/GPA are assumed to ONLY reflect his status as an "under-represented minority/underqualifed applicant. A minority's stats had better be unassailably brilliant, lest he have no defense whatsoever when it comes time to justify his presence at his given school. In short, he is not looked upon as an INDIVIDUAL with individual circumstances and life experiences. He is a cardboard cut-out, a symbol. He has no story beyond that of his race/ethnicity. "We don't care about your stinkin' LD. Go stand over there with the other statistics". </p>

<p>Statistics ARE the only thing that matter, aren't they, SBdad?</p>

<p>By the way, I ask the following question with all sincerity, because I guess I'm just not bright enough to figure it out on my own. Why in Heaven's name do you "support AA"? Honestly, I'd appreciate it if you would address this specifically. Unless I missed it somewhere, you've not set forth a single point in support of the policy you claim to support, indeed, quite the contrary. Why not just give in to your inner anti-AA and proclaim to the world (well, at least those of us here at CC) that you're against race being used as a factor in college admissions?</p>

193

<p>sbdad there's a continuous thought that URMs get easy admits, I can tell you they don't I am black, a tasper, I have a 2300+ SAT score, numerous leadership postions, 3x county and district champion in varsity sports, natl merit finalist, medical research and many more merits and I was neither admitted into Hopkins, Cornell, or Columbia, all of which (especially the two former) have a very low portion of blacks, so before you start yelling things maybe you should know what you're talking about
Secondly, in terms of self-interst upon which this nation is based, you are worried about your daughter just as much as most URMs are worried about AA for themselves. I however am not, I think the greatest factor in AA shouldn't be race or ethnicity but socio and economic wellbeing, which is very hard to measure might I say.</p>

<p>Also SBDAD I appreciate one thing you did, you spoke honestly, many would say you were a biggot or a racist, but I find truth beautiful, and you asid it without any fat. Take care</p>

194

<p>I dont have a problem with affirmative action but Iwould like to see more support for low income students of any race to attend college</p>

<p>Our flagship U- despite I-200( which outlawed AA) is taking a closer look at applications( specifically placing less emphases on numbers) which I think will benefit all students-</p>

<p>again- I am not as concerned with students with excellent grades and test scores- no matter what race- but I am concerned with students who get the message in high school or earlier that academics is not for them and I think to increase numbers of minorities in college- we need to first look at their preperation
<a href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_03.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_03.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Only 70% of all students in public high schools graduate, and only 32% of all students leave high school qualified to attend four-year colleges.</p>

<p>Only 51% of all black students and 52% of all Hispanic students graduate, and only 20% of all black students and 16% of all Hispanic students leave high school college-ready.</p>

<p>The graduation rate for white students was 72%; for Asian students, 79%; and for American Indian students, 54%. The college readiness rate for white students was 37%; for Asian students, 38%; for American Indian students, 14%.</p>

<p>Graduation rates in the Northeast (73%) and Midwest (77%) were higher than the overall national figure, while graduation rates in the South (65%) and West (69%) were lower than the national figure. The Northeast and the Midwest had the same college readiness rate as the nation overall (32%) while the South had a higher rate (38%) and the West had a lower rate (25%).</p>

<p>The state with the highest graduation rate in the nation was North Dakota (89%); the state with the lowest graduation rate in the nation was Florida (56%).</p>

<p>Due to their lower college readiness rates, black and Hispanic students are seriously underrepresented in the pool of minimally qualified college applicants. Only 9% of all college-ready graduates are black and another 9% are Hispanic, compared to a total population of 18-year-olds that is 14% black and 17% Hispanic.</p>

<p>We estimate that there were about 1,299,000 college-ready 18-year-olds in 2000, and the actual number of persons entering college for the first time in that year was about 1,341,000. This indicates that there is not a large population of college-ready graduates who are prevented from actually attending college.</p>

<p>The portion of all college freshmen that is black (11%) or Hispanic (7%) is very similar to their shares of the college-ready population (9% for both).
This suggests that the main reason these groups are underrepresented in college admissions is that these students are not acquiring college-ready skills in the K-12 system, rather than inadequate financial aid or affirmative action policies.

[/quote]
</p>

195

<p>
[quote]
This suggests that the main reason these groups are underrepresented in college admissions is that these students are not acquiring college-ready skills in the K-12 system, rather than inadequate financial aid or affirmative action policies.

[/quote]

What it takes is parents who care and step up. Drosselmeier knows this and felt his kids had a better chance with homeschooling. They did great! More power to him! Not everybody can homeschool, but everybody can be involved in the public schools and demand excellence. If communities throw up their hands in defeat, if they accept low quality education, they are contributing to the problem. AA is only the bandaid.</p>

<p>Just a little story: A school district near me recently decided that the cost of their IB program was prohibitive and the school board voted to phase it out. You should have seen the backlash! Hundreds of parents and students lobbied to keep the program! I don't know if IB was financially worth it or not, but those people cared. I was really impressed by their involvement.</p>

196

<p>I stopped reading awhile ago, but I just want to note a statistical fact (not related to my previous post):
If affirmative action were abolished, and as someone said that some of the URMs formerly at Harvard would end up Tufts, URMs would still on average, perform worse than average at their own school. If the races, at every strata, were in equal proportion, and say URM's comprise a fifth, then they, if admitted under the same standards, would perform roughly at average, as would all other races. </p>

<p>But that is not the case. As you approach the upper scales of whatever it is you admit for, the composition of the races changes, because each race's statistical distribution is different. It is such because distributions are in the shape of a bell curve. So just because you adhere to the same procedures, it does not mean you will have equal performance for each race. To wit, you would have to discriminate against some races to achieve that.</p>

<p>An example: America University must admit 100 students. It's first 20 students have an SAT score of 1500. The next 20 have a score of 1450, and so on. If greens do worse on say, SATs then, they will be more frequent in the lower (barring extreme variance) strata of applicants and enrolled students.</p>

<p>Dropping affirmative action will lessen, not abolish, academic gaps between races on campus.</p>

197

<p>
[quote]
You have just confirmed my growing suspicion that we are being had by numbers driven folks and ETS. I think the admissions officers are just a few steps ahead of most of us. Numbers are probably important to them, but only as a massive filter of students. That is probably how a committee of only about 40 people can get through 20,000 applications in only a few months. If an application comes by them with just that special quirkiness to catch their attention, then it probably doesn’t matter to them what numbers say.

[/quote]
I think that is true, especially at the top -- but my point is that with my daughter, people accept that explanation.</p>

<p>I am realizing now as I read the posts that you are a homeschooler -- and I can see where that presents an additional burden on your to make sure your kids test well -- though it really shouldn't be a case of needing perfect 800 scores. I'll bet that despite your URM status, colleges actually scrutinize your kids even more, simply because they don't come with the indicia of class rank/school profile -- so the burden is on you to prove that you've covered all the bases in your home education program. In other words -- I think that wherever your kids go, they've worked just a little bit harder, especially as compared to a kid who comes from a high school with a designer label. </p>

<p>But I still think its tough to be in a situation of always having to prove you are "deserving". As a woman, I am part of the first generation of female professionals that benefitted from affirmative action in law schools. I was an auto-admit to my top-ranked law school, admitted early on the basis of GPA and test scores alone -- but when I advocated expanded A.A. for minorities in a student publication, a prof. wrote a nasty letter labeling me as someone less qualified, only allowed in by virtue of my gender. But I am grateful that I didn't face the barriers that even the women in the class a year before mine faced. My great aunt went to law school in the 50's - she graduated #1 in her class at UCLA - and when she got out of school the only job she could get was as a secretary at a Legal Aid office.<br>

[quote]
“Well, it is obvious that what you have in numbers, you lack in personality, dynamism and passion. I have all this in addition to numbers that are at least respectable. So I’m in – and you’re not. Now you’ll just have to get over it.”

[/quote]
Well, that would be rude, LOL. Part of my daughter's charismatic personality is that she never says anything like that. But when it comes down to it, the problem is that the kids who don't get in are focusing too much on the numerical qualities -- and that very well may be why they didn't make it. I still think that a lot of kids get rejected by top schools because they are over-confident and simply don't put the effort needed into the application process.</p>

198

<p>SBDad,
I am not interested in "doing the research," SBDad, because this is YOUR topic, not mine. I have not much interest in the SATs, period. My position on this is well-traveled on CC. I don't know how long you've been on the forum, because I forgot to check your start date, but the reason I am not providing oodles of research to back up the high scores of many URMs admitted to Ivies, is that it has been cited, backed up before on CC - with examples. In fact, some of the recent admits to Ivies this yr., posting on CC, may be URMs with high scores.</p>

<p>I didn't claim to be the expert, so I don't know why you're attacking me. In fact, specifically I deferred to Northstarmom on this point. Posters (esp. students) love to rail away at the supposedly low scores of URMs admitted to Ivies, & she has frequently corrected them on PF & on the student forums. (Over the last year and a half.) Why are you challenging me to a duel? It's very juvenile, i.m.o.</p>

<p>I'm aware of some of the AA situations at U of M, & some of the struggles of some of the AA students admitted there. (Not dissimilar to struggles of admitted students at U.C. Berkeley.) But you didn't, as I recall, begin this thread with a discussion of U of M. Rather, it was a swipe at the students who have recently been admitted to Ivies & posted their stats on CC, since similar students may possibly supplant your son ("at his expense") later.</p>

<p>I've also tried to explain that it's not necessarily even mainly about the stats, for any student, of any race, but you just don't want to hear that, or maybe you don't like that fact, & prefer "pure" meritocracies. In which case, please take this up with admissions committees, not with me.</p>

<p>This is why many of us often refuse to post in the AA threads. They inevitably, or at least usually, devolve into unnecessary hostility & personal attacks, challenges, etc.</p>

<p>I'm not uninformed, sir. Please get informed yourself, & stop picking on me. Until now I have been a lot more cordial than many who have posted on this thread, but you're choosing to get hostile, & I don't like it. I'll say good-bye now, or rather, good riddance.</p>

199

<p>"research to back up the high scores of many URMs admitted to Ivies,"
Of course there are high scoring URMs, but the argument is about the average, the general, not the outliers or anomalies. Citing the outlier is the most bare fallacy.</p>

200

<p>If a student doesn't want to play on the field of non-academic-merit admissions preferences, whether based on URM, legacy, athletic ability, development, or whatever, then he/she should apply to universities in the UK.</p>