<p>I'm an elitist and I won't attempt to conceal it in this post. Blacks, Indians, and Hispanics have absolutely no reason in the year 2005 in the United States to have any advantage over equally qualified whites or asians. Sure these groups in the past have been socio-economically challenged, but the United States in these times is geared toward giving everyone an equal shot. If a disadvantaged kid who is academically geared goes to a disadvantaged high school in our country they still have the same opportunity to be first in their class and make that elusive 4.0; I would also argue that they actually have a better chance to attain that going to a disadvantaged school over the rich kids who go to prestigous boarding schools. They still have the same chance to show their aptitude for further study by taking the SAT. </p>
<p>I am not an asian to preface this. But, I am utterly appalled at the fact that our nation's college system discriminates against this race for the pure fact that they are more academically inclined than other races. It's no secret that blacks rule the basketball due to their athletic superiority. Do colleges choose sub-par white guys to play for them in order to help out their race's athletic disadvantage? No, they don't. If alot of Asians make excellent scores on their standardized tests and have excellent grades then their should be no reason that they do not have absolutely priority in admission to selective universities. It makes me sick to think unqualified URM's are getting these spots.</p>
<p>I am marking "prefer not to answer" on all of the race questions on my college applications.</p>
<p>The people who are in favor of AA need to get over their idealist views of the world. To make it in this world you need to be good at what you do, and if you're not good at what you do then you have absolutely no right to have an advantage over anyone else for any reason whatsoever.</p>
<p>Alas, I'm one of the few realists in this world. And what I say has no bearing on anything that will happen. </p>
<p>And Jeff to comment on your post about the differences in funding for white and black schools. Funding comes from the citizens of the school district in the taxes. The white school district where you are from obviously had more tax revenue and that's where the extra funds came from. This happens when there is a poor white school district and a rich white school district too. It's not about race anymore.</p>
<p>Let's be clear, here. Not all institutions practice affirmative action. Furthermore, not all of those who do "discriminate against" Asian-Americans, either. </p>
<p>Very broad brushstrokes being painted here.</p>
<p>wait wait, sure blacks and hispanics have been badly treated in the past. but so have asians! i mean, asians were shipped to NA to work dirty labor on the railways! not to mention they didn't get voting rights here, in canada, until like past the second world war!</p>
<p>In actuality, i see far more racism against asians today than against blacks or hispanics.</p>
<p>"Sure these groups in the past have been socio-economically challenged, but the United States in these times is geared toward giving everyone an equal shot."
Oh please. Astrife, you are not one of the few realists in the world, you are one of the many ignorant individuals choosing the ignore the state of race relations in this country. Sure, much progress has been made within the past several decades, that can't be denied. But the fact remains that we are still living in a nation where an African American male's odds of achieving a high school diploma are less than half--you must be out of your mind if you're going to even try to prove that that figure is due solely to a demographic of unmotivated individuals. Affirmative Action is NOT geared towards providing reparations for social injustices, it was created with the goal of equalizing opportunities in higher education along with creating more diverse learning environments. Unless you happen to be a Native American (the race with the absolute lowest college graduation rate) your minority status alone will probably not get you into one of the better universities in the United States. I don't happen to be a minority, but I don't believe that I am "hurt" in the admissions process by affirmative action in any way whatsoever.
And, Joethemole, if you are trying to argue that asians should have a statistical advantage in admissions, you should perhaps argue about that for any racial group other than white anglo-saxon protestants. WASPs aside, nealy EVERY group has faced injustices in this ridiculously unjust country.</p>
<p>Ok, I'm going to cite a court case to support my point that this does happen. </p>
<p>Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
-In this case the the medical school eager to produce more minority physicians set aside 16 of the 100 places in the class for "disadvantaged groups".
-One white applicant who did get acceptance was Allan Bakke. After Bakke learned that the mean scores of the minority students admitted were in the 46th percentile on verbal tests and the 35th percentile on science tests. His test scores were 96th percentile and 97th percentile respectively.
-He then sued UC-Davis claiming he had been denied equal protection of the laws by discriminating against him because of his race.
-The Supreme Court ordered him admitted. They abolished the way universities would set aside a certain number of spots for minorites, and made it so that minority status could not be sole criterion, but instead could be apart of a number of other factors in admission selection. What this means is that UC-Davis could go on doing what they were doing they just could not explicitly state that minorities were guarenteed 16 spots in their freshman class.</p>
<p>This shows you what it's really like. And although universities can not make minoritiy status criterion for certain spots in a freshman class they can still give advantage based on race. If you do not believe that universities still do admit URM's that have wide discrepencies in scores between the bulk of the admitted class then you are very naive. URM's should get no special priveleges. A student whose family makes less than 25,000 a year regardless of race should be considered disadvantaged, and if we are really are going to give advantage to disadvantaged applicants then we should give it to them.</p>
<p>That is completely wrong noodles. Thank god I'm in AP Government this semester to argue my point. Affirmative Action was enstated not to improve equal opportunity. It came about when people started looking at the statistics of the minorities and their accomplishments. Affirmative Action legislation was a move to make those statistics more politically and ideally correct. It was a move from equal opportunity to equal results (I emphasize equal results because it's just not justifiable for a government to want equal results in the education sector and job market between genetically distinct races). It's not racist in the least for me to say there is only a small minority of blacks who actually score higher than 1500 on their SAT. It's a fact. The test can be studied for, but the vast majority of people who score where they do on those tests due so from pure aptitude for the material.</p>
<p>And something as a side note. I know a girl personally who is classified as Native American. Her dad, classified the same as well was admitted to Harvard Medical School. She herself told me that her father primarily was accepted because of his status. She is applying for Harvard this coming fall, and marking the URM box for Native American. Should this upper class white looking girl get that advantage (You wouldn't know she's native american by looking)?</p>
<p>Everybody has heard of the Bakke case, and no one here is trying to make the case that affirmative action does not exist. An "edge," however, from having a minority status does not come from a set minority-favoring policy (usually) but rather from the desire to create more diverse classes and to acknowledge the educational disadvantages many face. Because tax dollars go to fund district schools, of course most children in wealthier areas get a better education. Money is the real issue here, and economic means and race are not always directly linked--I'm not saying that. There are poor non-minorities who suffer in the education they receive, and this is certainly taken into consideration in admissions. When finances factor into education, it is the college admissions process that is left to pick up the mess of a still-unequal society.</p>
<p>Taffy.... obviously you have not filled out a financial aid form yourself. If the parents were successful and then retired they would still have tremendous assets. These are accounted for when financial aid is given out.</p>
<p>Depute some myths from what AbeMartin was saying...</p>
<p>"...while your parents are doctors and lawyers, thier mothers if father is even around has 5 jobs and tries to take care of her children." </p>
<p>That line is so yesterday. You grab it off the line without much thinking.</p>
<p>Why do whites tend to self-deprecate whenever AA is mentioned. Why do we assume black applicants all come from disadvantaged backgd? </p>
<p>Treatment of blacks have improved since the 50's and that is a fact.
In fact so much slack were given to blacks that has become counter-productive.</p>
<p>The other day I went to Honey-Baked Ham to pick up a ham for a party.
There were 2 girls in the store, one black one white. The black girl did everything to avoid having to do any work, pushed the white girl who was a very sweet person (or maybe shes a little afraid of her too) to handle everything. On top of that she did it in a condescending way too. Far as I could tell they were co-workers on the same level.</p>
<p>"Me work? I am black! "
"Here do this, white girl."</p>
<p>You probably have stories of your own.</p>
<p>Along the way I think black folks can do more to better themselves.
Blaming the establishment would only carry one so far. Nobody in the last 2 centuries have kept any black slaves in US. That's not to say there aren't hard-working,honest black folks who is fighting racism
and from their own people who perpetuating the stigma of welfare class.</p>
<p>Lastly, we did not create welfare to enslave blacks. Anyone with an open mind would see that as a weak argument.</p>
<p>Another thought, AA also cuts against high-achieving blacks who got into competitive programs but feel the scorn that whenever people look at them, they think they got there by being URM. Not a black person myself, it is not fair for me to even say I feel your pain, although I can imagine a little bit of what it is like. I think it would eat me up. How do you deal with this?</p>
<p>Yeah okay, so back to my post lol. How credible is the author's story? You've said that Dartmouth's mission is to secure NA educaton, but what about for other UNDEREPRESENTED minorities?</p>
<p>The amount of stupidity displayed here is appalling, and makes me really doubt the American education system. I would like to speak to yourworld's educators and find out whether they endorsed the following statement:
"Blaming the establishment would only carry one so far. Nobody in the last 2 centuries have kept any black slaves in US. That's not to say there aren't hard-working,honest black folks who is fighting racism
and from their own people who perpetuating the stigma of welfare class."
First of all, 2005-200=1805. 200 years ago Americans did own slaves, just in case you happened to miss that math or history lesson. The story you recounted is a ridiculous one, even if it is true. Sure, when AA benefits wealthy minorities who have had the opportunity of an education it seems a little ridiculous. But there is also the other side of things, and the goal of creating diverse learning environments, the likes of which it does not seem that many people posting on this thread have had the advantage.</p>
<p>As a person coming from another country (Honkg Kong, China), it amazes me when students score low, people put blames on socio-economic status, quality of school facility, quality of teachers instead of the students themselves. When I first came here, I was amazed how big high schools here were. In terms of athletic facility, the school I went has over 1,000 students but only one basketball court where students set up goal post to play mini soccer as well and two badminton courts. The students/teacher ratio was 40:1. High schools here, even the "poor" ones, are well-equipped compared to those in China. Over there, rarely do people look into teachers and facility..to see how they correlate with students' performance. It's pretty much assumed that academic success correlates mostly/solely with students' commitment to study. Despite the subpar facilities, high students:teach ratio..etc, students from Hong Kong are consistently among the top in international survey. I have yet seen a survey that shows average hours of study students put in when they look at the performance difference among different races. They look at socio-economical factors, social environment...etc. Maybe the former is politically incorrect?</p>
<p>I don't think it's right to let a minority into a prestigious university if their SAT scores or school grades are miles below the standard. On the other hand, I think that it's important to look at an applicant's whole context. A poor white applicant should be ROUGHLY about equal to a poor Hispanic applicant, as should a rich white applicant and a rich Hispanic applicant. Again, ROUGHLY. But I think that even with all the progress this country has undergone in the last fifty years, we would turning back the clock if we ignored race completely in the admissions process. A rich white smart guy might burn out in college, partying and goofing off, whereas some poor Hispanic girl might finally have found the right environment with the right resources to further her pursuit of biochemistry. </p>
<p>It's a really touchy issue, and there's validity to both sides of the argument. I think that race shouldn't be the deciding factor in any admissions decision, particularly if it's compromising the standards the school generally has. But I do think that race should be included in the admissions decision because that is a relevant issue.</p>
<p>The poster before this one makes a wonderful point about the Asian education system. I would bet every dollar I have that there are kids from Asia in worse socio-economic conditions than any "disadvantaged" kid in America and they still perform at excellent levels in academics. In America it's not about where you came from, it's about your aptitude and how much time you are willing to put into doing well. I'm so sick of this politically correct idealism. If you don't have the numbers, you should not get in. </p>
<p>When I go to the doctor I expect a person who had the aptitude and desire to do well in his profession to make a good MCAT score and have good grades. I do not care if he came from a "disadvantaged backgroung", that is irrelevant. Is he competent to treat me is the question.</p>
<p>I go to a school that is 20% black and about 10% hispanic. I have never once in my entire educational career encountered any one of these students I have been in class with receive any kind of unfair grade, unwarranted discipline, or general animosity because of their race. And I'm sure if it were to happen, it would not be the type of thing that would go unoticed. Some of these kids have part-time jobs detracting from study time, but I have a part-time job as well and found time for studying none-the-less. As well I dont think the SAT grades on harder curve for blacks, hispanics or native americans. Their numbers are a result of their effort and aptitude not because of their "disadvantaged" background.</p>
<p>Affirmative Action really doesn't make sense.
Asians get left out of Affirmative Action because they are the one of the few that actually try to achieve despite being socieconomically disadvantaged. No matter how crappy your school is, if you have right the mindset, you can achieve - don't give me that B.S. about how bad schools and such keep you from doing well. You don't need a brand-new school with a swimming pool to study for the SATs. I know a black kid who lives in the worst part of area who maintains a 3.6 gpa and a 2000+ SAT. His financial situation sucks but he actually tries to do well. Instead of watching some extra TV or spending that extra dollar on McDonalds he would save up for books and study. The rest of the kids that I see there in that area are just focused on getting girls and smoking you-know-what. Damn straight that's sterotypical, but I'll swear it's true because I see this all the time straight in the urban areas of NY. You're telling me that these guys HAVE to chill out on the street for half the day doing jack because they're economically disadvantaged? It's the MINDSET, not the socioeconomic factors that hold these guys back from doing well academically.</p>
<p>I think the last few posters really nailed the reasons for academic excellence. Risking repeat of what ppl before me have said so nicely, </p>
<p>it's: aptitude, attitude, motivation and how much work you put into it. </p>
<p>Some of the highest achieving students I know came from Vietnam. You want to talk disadvantaged backgd ? Some didn't even speak English until 8 years ago.</p>
<p>RE: iLikeNoodles -
I let others who read my post ( oct 30 11:58pm )decide if I am ridiculous. Some people prefer to askew the truth. By the way I do thank you for the history lesson. The civil war ended 1865. Therefore America has been only slave-free since the last century.</p>