I wish I weren't Asian

College Confidential Community
261

<p>epiphany,</p>

<p>First off, thanks for setting aside some time to answer my questions. I appreciate it.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Special rules for them. Special inclusions for them. Special understanding for their cultural norms (unlike for black cultural norms), a kind of weighting/preference for scores (vs. other elements in an app.) Special consideration of their expectations. Special rewards for their "hard work."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would also like you to describe these, if you have the time later on.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>What rules? I certainly don't believe that Asians should be held to different standards. Absolutely not.</p></li>
<li><p>What inclusions? I'm kind of confused with this one.</p></li>
<li><p>Special understanding? Definitely not. Again, I don't believe that Asians should be held to different standards. No way.</p></li>
<li><p>Now, emphasis on scores, that's something I support. I think a student who earned his scores would be very dissatisfied if these were discounted, and I think this holds true regardless of what race that student is.</p></li>
<li><p>Special consideration of their expectations? That is to say, a different standard? No. Just no.</p></li>
<li><p>Special rewards for their "hard work"? Hmm, I'm going to have to say no for the simple reason that doing so involves a different standard, which I don't support.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I do not and will never support preferential treatment for my racial group. Never.</p>

262

<p>Fab:</p>

<p>
[quote]
You agree with me that Blacks should not be discriminated against. But, I would still like an answer to the following question: Do you agree with me that Blacks should not be discriminated for? It's a simple yes or no question, and I have received neither yes nor no as of yet.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>As I've said before, it is not a simple yes or no answer--not a zero sum game.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The thread is open to comment from anyone, but you took a question out of its context and answered it, even though it was not addressed to you.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, it was not out of context.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I am different from Drosselmeier in the sense that I would never support racial preference for my group or for any group.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yet you advocate for giving more weight to test scores (at the macro level) which does benefit East Asians as a group (macro). That is a preference that disproportionately affect particular groups (macro).</p>

<p>
[quote]
It's discrimination when I exclude ethnicity? WOAH! Wait a minute, wait, please. Let me get this straight. It's not discrimination when I use ethnicity, but it is when I don't?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When you advocate for a heavier dependence on test scores and do not consider ethnicity, gender, et al. it is discrimination to arbitrarily elevate one of the factors in holistic admissions disproportionately over all others. Context in college admissions is important when looking at individuals (micro level). By not considering all the elements that make up an individual (micro), it is a judgement call or discrimination if you prefer. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Huh, I never thought of it that way. Maybe I should start judging people based on their skin colors instead of their characters. I mean, according to you, when I look at them as individuals as opposed to members of racial groups, I'm discriminating against them.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, I believe in a holistic admissions process...since it is about an individual (micro). General group affiliations (macro) are sometimes different than those individuals that belong to it. I'm not the one that equates the mircro and macro. You advocate that relationship, since your concern is about Asians as a group at times, and Asians as indivudals at times (at least when it comes to selective college admissions). Yet you see other URMs as representative of a group (macro) when talking about scores in your posts above.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I should correct my poor behavior as soon as possible.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Correcting your behavior is a choice that only you can make. I have no opinion on your behavior.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That is your right.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Close the funding gap? The funding should come from the state and federal levels in addition to the local level.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Such funding disproportionately is given to more affluent public schools. See articles posted earlier.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Combating gerrymandering? That's a tough one, actually. I'd like to think that a federal agency oversees this, but I don't know.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Legislatures change district lines to suit their needs. Unless a group is highly organized, state legislatures can get away with gerrymandering. Unless it is the courts, there is little oversight.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Differences in rates? I don't know how the banking and investment systems work in this regard. I'd like to think that if a person has good credit history and health background, then he is eligible to take out a loan or purchase a policy at the advertised rates.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Minority applicants with the same credit rating as those who are white sometimes pay higher rates (mortgage, loan, insurance) than those in the majority. Which means less disposable income--affecting their quality of life. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And, I do not see how extending preference based on race closes the funding gap. Poverty knows no race; it can affect anyone and everyone.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>While poverty can affect anyone, it disproportionately affects minority communities as a percentage of the whole, although whites have higher numbers in poverty (since they make up most of the general population). That is why a holistic admissions process that considers ethnicity, income, gender, race, test scores, ECs, opportunities avaiable, etc...is better, at least in my opinion--since it considers the circumstances of poor whites and URMs. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Of course I'm not objective in this matter. I only see one benefit of affirmative action (ie. a campus that has higher percentages of certain races).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, that is what you chose to see.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You can't convince me that treating someone differently based on his race is the right thing to do.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yet, by advocating for a heavier dependence on test scores, that is exactly what you are doing at the macro level. If you are arguing that each candidate should be judged holistically in college admissions, I agree. If you argue that Asians as a group (macro) are discriminated against AND you advocate for higher dependence on test scores, you are using ethnicity as a factor at the macro level, which also means that you are making judgements about group affiliations (i.e. ethnicity) at the macro level.</p>

<p>You need to choose between micro and macro concerns. Their are obvious differences when you mix them. For instance, I believe in the micro view, as long as a holistic approach is used. I believe that there are macro problems that need to be address so that they do not affect students as individuals (at the micro level).</p>

<p>Barring the wholesale change in attitude by the majority (macro), a holistic approach is preferable in selective college admissions (micro). Different schools have different policies regarding their criteria.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You can't convince me that institutionalized racism benefits society.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, institutionalized racism is illeagal in the US. A holistic approach to college admissions, in the UMichigan case, was deemed constitutional.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You can't convince me that the playing field becomes more level when some groups are deemed preferred groups.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You can't convince me that the playing field starts off as level, when some groups have the power to designate who is favored politically, socially, economically, etc...</p>

<p>AA encourage minorities and women to go to college or enter professions that traditionally do not have them as members. I do not see a problem with that. </p>

<p>If you are concerned, you should have a better plan that does not favor those who have had/have the power in most areas of society, including college admissions (legacies, developmental candidates, athletes, etc...), in the short run. If you can think of a solution to that issue, I'd have no problem giving up AA for a practice that does not require making judgement calls.</p>

<p>The issue is that in a selective college process, judgements are made about individual fitness measured agains a defined norm (applicant pool), whatever that maybe.</p>

<p>Although you may think we are diametrically opposed, I don't believe that we are. I believe in the individual (micro), despite larger social norms or trends (macro), so a holistic process is somewhat fair--I believe that Asian individuals (micro) can distingush themselves in areas besides test scores, unlike some posters. </p>

<p>That Asians as a group (macro) score higher than other groups (macro) is less important to me, besides its use as a measurement (macro). And, overarching policies (macro) tend to favor the majority in control (both macro & micro). That is a fact of life (for better or worse, as you pointed out). I have little control at the macro level. </p>

<p>At the micro level, a holistic approach is acceptable because different individuals excel at different things, have certain qualities, experiences, personal histories, etc...as evident in their applications to different colleges.</p>

263

<p>I think if we are going to claim people believe such and such, we ought to be honest about it and have the courtesy to really pinpoint the beliefs without employing childish fallacies. It is unfair to simply say “Drosselmeier supports racial preferences for blacks” without being sure to address my precise beliefs. The way it is presented here sounds as if I want schools to just go out and handpick blacks just because they are black, when I have never advocated any such thing. Even if one disagrees with my view, integrity would cause one to at least be sure to address the view and not an abortion of it. The fact is, it is my belief that if we do nothing regarding race in college admissions, it will amount to a de facto racial preference for whites and Asians because blacks are largely out of the educational loop, and have been since slavery. My view is that we need to keep this history and current structural racism in mind when we see a black guy who meets all the other standards set by other students. In this way, he does not get lost in the crowd, whether he is accepted at a school or not.</p>

<p>“Bowen and Bok conclude that attending a highly selective school, regardless of test scores, gives one a huge advantage in life. They also conclude that, contrary to the theories of affirmative action foes, minority students with less-than-stellar test scores do better at institutions that are extremely challenging academically than at universities that are less demanding. "The fact that graduation rates increase as the selectivity of the college rises and that students of the same academic ability graduate at higher rates when they attend more selective institutions shows that carefully chosen minority students have not suffered from attending colleges heavily populated by white and Asian-American classmates with higher standardized test scores," write Bowen and Bok. "Quite the contrary -- they have fared best in such settings." Moreover, those who attended the most selective institutions (whatever their test scores) were more likely than those who went to lesser schools to earn advanced degrees.”
<a href="http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/1999/janfeb/articles/admissions.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/1999/janfeb/articles/admissions.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I think when blacks enter the elites, they benefit more than any other group, including whites. They also participate in helping their communities more than others. This is key because even if these blacks are ridiculed by other blacks, they will certainly raise their own children with the values that tend to bring about success, both for themselves and their communities. Yes, I think blacks should look at a wide variety of schools because not all blacks can handle work at elite schools. Though blacks do not do as well at less selective schools, any school is better than no school. But the probabilities of their doing well seems to go up so significantly when they attend elite schools, those schools can have a great effect on blacks nationwide over the long term. My wish is to see blacks do as best as they can as quickly as they can, and it seems elite schools offer this opportunity. They need this more than Asians, and more than any other group because they, and they only, have been denied freedom to the extent that even their own bodies were owned by others.</p>

264

<p>IsleBoy,</p>

<p>I say it is absolutely wrong to discriminate against Blacks. You agree with me when you say that the answer is clearly No! This question received a simple answer. But, when we change one word, it becomes too complicated. This isn't Fermat's Last Theorem. It's a very simple yes or no question.</p>

<p>But, if you won't answer that question, then please answer me this: Should Whites, Asians, and Hispanics be discriminated for? </p>

<p>I support using test scores as a top factor. Who benefits? Anyone who earned high scores. Does this benefit the East Asian with an 1800 SAT score? Only if he scored better than most of his peers in the pool. Does this benefit the Black with a 2400 SAT score? Considering that it's 2400 / 2400, yes, yes it does.</p>

<p>Also, I fail to see how extending preference based on race reduces the funding gap, prevents redistricting, and destroys stereotypes.</p>

<p>Poverty can affect anyone. It doesn't care what color its victim is. Under your system, you'd have to determine what's more damaging - being a rich Black or a poor White. The first person might have had "built-in downward pressures" and feels that his country "disowns him" while the second person probably grew up with limited financial resources. What's worse? Do you know if the first person in fact has these mysterious "built-in downward pressures" and feels "un-American"? But, you do know that the second person grew up poor, and his being White had nothing to do with it.</p>

<p>Tell me why I should judge a person by his race. Really, I'll read what you write.</p>

<p>Tell me why I should trust a system that prefers certain races over others.</p>

<p>Tell me how extending preference to certain races makes them stronger candidates. Does it result in higher scores? Stronger essays? Deeper community involvement? No. No. And, no.</p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]
AA encourage minorities and women to go to college or enter professions that traditionally do not have them as members. I do not see a problem with that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If by AA you mean aggressive nondiscrimination policies, it most certainly does encourage minorities and women. Not only that, but it also makes them feel that they can do it by their own merits. If by AA you mean group preferences, then yeah, it can encourage minorities and women. It can also cause them to fear that their merits weren't good enough.</p>

<p>We are certainly not opposed on every issue. For example, we both agree that discriminating against Blacks is wrong. Yet, I take it one step further and say that no group should be discriminated for, either, while you have yet to support such a statement.</p>

265

<p>Drosselmeier,</p>

<p>If a Black student meets the standards, then he can be accepted by his merits. His race shouldn't have been looked at whatsoever. He's good. End of story.</p>

<p>Here at CC, students are advised to have safeties, matches, and reaches. Everyone is advised to do so. I highly, HIGHLY doubt that a Black student who meets or exceeds the standards will be rejected at every school he applied to because his race wasn't considered. That's the hyperbole that BAMN spews out when it campaigns against civil rights initiatives. Yet, this group mysteriously disregarded the fact that after 1996, the UC system has more Blacks enrolled than it did under the racial preference system. Are Blacks kept out? NO!</p>

<p>A majority of the citizens of CA, TX, and MI voted against racial preferences, not diversity. The two are quite different. The UC system is even more diverse now than it was then, and this is without any racial preferences. How many Black applicants got lost in the crowd? Not many, it seems.</p>

<p>I think a big problem of your "we were enslaved, we deserve reparations via racial preferences" argument is, How do you know who is the descendant of a slave and who is the son of an immigrant?</p>

<p>You have stated before that this country owes nothing to African immigrants. Their being Black doesn't mean anything. In fact, since they voluntarily emigrate, they assume this country's debts.</p>

<p>But, how do you know that a Black man you meet on the street isn't the grandson of an immigrant from Ethiopia? How do you know that the Black woman you pass on the subway isn't the daughter of Senegalese immigrant? If these students, who are Black Americans, check the Black / African American box, are they lying? Of course not. But, they weren't the descendants of slaves in this nation. They didn't experience the legacies of slavery and segregation from their immediate families. According to you, they shouldn't be given racial preferences. But, they are.</p>

<p>How can you prevent that from happening? How can you ensure that racial preferences target the descendants of slaves and not the children of immigrants?</p>

<p>And, do the children of immigrants have "built-in downward pressures?"</p>

266

<p>I really wish I weren't asian whenever I have to check minority percentage of each college.</p>

267

<p>fabrizio. check out the movie Boys N the Hood, which I'm sure you have not yet seen. Even if you did, you totally did not get the real message out of this movie. It is really sad, but it is still happening in America. I'm sure many people would agree with me that a Black student meeting the standards is very difficult. Not because of his/her inadequacy, but because of unstoppable violence that plagues urban life, where poor immigrants and African Americans are dominant. </p>

<p>You say we "have to determine what's more damaging - being a rich Black or a poor White"??
Do you really think a kid raised on Long Island and a kid raised in Harlem has same chance of meeting American standars? We are not just talking about RACE, we are talking about something else. </p>

<p>"we were enslaved, we deserve reparations via racial preferences"
I disagree with this statement though. </p>

<p>The percentage of black students in most colleges is less than 10%. The percentage of Asians in most colleges will never be greater than 60% of student body. </p>

<p>Minorities will always be miniorities.</p>

268

<p>fobnyker,</p>

<p>Yes, I did see Boyz N The Hood, but it has been a while since I last saw it.</p>

<p>I think under-performing schools should be better funded. They should have better trained teachers. They should have access to the information publicly offered by the College Board. They should be using modern textbooks. How can this be done? More funding should target these schools, and this should come from the state and federal levels in addition to the local levels.</p>

<p>Is this a difficult problem? Yes. Is a solution to this problem easy? No. Do I know everything there is to know about this problem? Of course not.</p>

<p>Does extending preference to certain racial groups solve this problem? No.</p>

269

<p>Fab, I feel more comfortable, LOL, answered holistically, because some of my points overlap with more than one question, & also address points you & others have been debating.</p>

<p>I think what Drosselmeir has been enunciating is that comparing Black Americans to Asian Americans is an apples/oranges comparison. (Sorry if I’m repeating what’s been said or alluded to by him or others.) While both are minorities, there are a host of differences -- in circumstances, societal perceptions, family structure, immediate environment, and family expectations. To make a tangential point, IsleBoy has described in many learned posts that there are important qualititative differences among the subgroups loosely called “Asians.” So certainly if even within an umbrella racial group, major differences in opportunities are evident, how more so is this true between different racial categories. I see you often making a one-for-one equivalency between black families (& supposed opportunities for encouragement, achievement, desire to learn), versus Asian American families. That is not to say that all minorities do not face some degree of obstacles from the mere fact that they do not control the institutions of power. (Some would argue that Asians have gained much more control within economic institutions versus 20+ yrs. Ago)Many of your statements have referenced motivation of black students & encouragement in the home. The point is, there is much less of that encouragement, overall, in black families, than in Asian families, including in most recent immigrant Asian families. Whether or not black families “should” have the internal motivation that Asian famlies have is a theoretical question, not a practical one. No student of any race has control over, or responsiblity over, whether his parents & immediate community will support & encourage him. Drosselmeier is correct when he tells you that the family situations are not comparable. (I see the vast difference because I teach in multi-ethnic settings, and often teach in the home.) When he provides a background reaching back to slavery, I don’t think it is for the purposes of assessing guilt to other ethnic groups or of making other ethnic groups responsible today for something that happened “yesterday.” He’s trying to flesh out for you why the motivational energy in an Asian family will less commonly be there in an American black family (esp. in those of depressed urban settings). There are always the exceptions. Two of my African-American families live in (different) poor areas, yet in both cases the parents are very involved, very hands-on in the education, & it is clearly showing in the progress of those students. Those students will have the “advantage” of supportive parents, but unlike Asian counterparts, will continue to negotatiate against an immediate community which is hardly unaimous in its own support.</p>

<p>When an East Asian or Southeast Asian family immigrates to this country, they sometimes come with very little income themselves, and with only motivation. They sometimes li ve in crowded urban conditions in NY, SF, etc. In that sense there is a commonality with the American urban black family: the neighborhood is often “sketchy” – being in or on the edge of a heavy crime area, or being a “transitional” neighborhood, bordering one with more active crime. Similar, too, can be the educational background of the parents of recent arrivals. Asian immigrants, like the parents of many urban black students, often have very little formal education. (Obviously I’m not talking about the more established ones here; those with a profession, an established trade, are often able to settle in a middle class locale in the U.S. Rather, I’m trying to keep within appropriate parallels.)</p>

<p>But here the similarities stop, and the critical differences begin – differences immediately affecting the academic progress & future of the immigrants’ children. Immigrant children can be assured of an unambiguous message both from parents and from the immediate community: academic success are (most often) the parents’ goals & the community’s goals. A Korea Town, a Japan Town, a Chinatown will often include a community center staffed by young Asian adults who manage & organize on-site after-school help for young students. Drossel is trying to illustrate how that is not the pattern in an American black community. That community will often be at odds with a student/family committed to academics. Some neighborhoods will be lucky to have a community center, period. A student, conscious of fitting in to his community, much more often has to choose between acceptance by the community (which may see academics as an “establishment,” i.e., “white” activity) versus acceptance by a different community about which his own community feels at least ambivalent. And it’s one thing for that “decision” to be made by an adult; it’s a different level of decision – much less power-enabled & much less conscious – made by a student. A typical example near me is a community center which focuses on tutoring inner-city youth. Who provides the tutoring? Not African-Americans, who by the way if in college usually must spend their available free time for paid work, not volunteering. Mostly it’s U.C. students of Middle Eastern and South Asian ancestry. These latter students have described to me their struggles with the antagonism of those they’re tutoring.</p>

270

<p>...The East Asian cultures in their own respective countries place a strong value on conforming to authority and to those in the power structure. What Drossel is trying to tell you is, that is almost in opposition to the American black culture. And US colleges are part of the American power structure. So in that respect, Asian immigrants come to this country with “an advantage” in that they are already oriented toward the values reflected in US educational institutions. Should they be “punished” for that? Absolutely not, and they are not punished for that. Thousands of them are admitted to Elites every yr. But to overwhelmingly reward the Asian pattern, for “fitting in” better with the American pattern, would result in elimination of the occasional promising black student coming from a conflicted and non-conforming setting. </p>

<p>Asian & Anglo communities already have their role models within poor & middle class communities, as I just illustrated. It’s not a Big Deal to have, not just one role model, but a host of them (for example, at an East Asian community center). And by the way, the fact that there is a critical mass of role models is also pivotal to outcomes.</p>

<p>You addressed K-12 preparation. One of the major reasons for the deficitis in this, in the black community, is related to lack of role modeling. Pre-college students are partly motivated by whether there’s an advantage to a K-12 education. (Never mind beyond that.) This is where a single graduate (even better if there were several!) from an elite U can inspire a student to stay on track in the middle & high school years. I recently had a student from a poor black community & struggling single-parent family who announced to me that he wanted to do extremely well because of a local mentor who was a graduate from U of Chicago -- volunteering his time in the community center. (Unlike a typical Asian comm. center with often a whole team of role models.) So the point is that a single successful grad from an Elite can do more to inspire K-12 students than, by itself, government funding (i.e., your suggestion). </p>

<p>Back to the team model I just referenced. This is one way that I think Asians have an enormous contribution to make to the black community, in terms of example. A targeted way to use gov’t funds might be to fund volunteer internships for black college students, to work in team structures in neighborhood centers which would include parent staffing as well. (The similar inter-generational modeling in Asian communities is a very powerful factor, but has not been there in black communities for reasons that have been discussed.) It’s a way of re-prioritizing the focus of a community, vs. just the focus of one person. It will tend to happen more with more graduates from Elites being visible in these communities, and which may in turn begin to establish an intergenerational presence in future years, along with better adult education & re-entry efforts. Drossel & I have had many conversations about these needs. The education saturation model in Asian and Anglo upbringing (Anglos receiving it largely at home, with educated parents; Asians receiving it often at home + community, sometimes one or the other) is the model that is at least inconsistent when it is not entirely absent for the African-American student not born into a middle class existence. Government funds can be applied to community/team/family educational support structures in urban locations, which would look very different from either traditional schools or generic community centers. (But we’re not there yet.)</p>

<p>Back to your questions. When I mentioned special allowances for Asians, what I was talking about is that you strongly object to “personal qualities” as a component of college qualification. But if Blacks can be asked to have high test scores, then Asians can asked to show strong personal qualities. And please don’t confuse the WASP-y social ostracization of Jews in another era for a preference today for attributes of character (Leadership in the way I’ve previously described; generosity; sacrifice.) An ESL Chinese or Korean student is not going to be denied an Elite admission for a narrow reason like awkwardeness in conversation (particularly if there’s an accent & other language hurdles involved). What might impact him or her, though, is difficulty expressing one’s fitness for the U, etc. (orally or on paper) if indeed there are significant language challenges. The U can only deal with the data that it has available, & the limitations of how that data is delivered.</p>

<p>It is very difficult to answer some of your questions, including ones raised previously, because they tend to fall into an either/or pattern, which shows me that you still don’t quite understand how the admissions process works. It is not quite a one-for-one, one-against-one contest. It’s not quite a scorecard situation where they figure out how they can deny one Asian so as to admit one Black. Not only is each student looked at holistically, the potential class altogether is looked at holistically. If an Elite had already some likely admits in a pile, those Likelies including up to even a 30% Asian student compoent, while one more “similar” application is being reviewed that doesn’t stand out versus already stand-out apps, & I mean stand out for unusualness not just stand out for quality – but an accomplished Black candidate is also being reviewed in the same final round, a student with a 100-point lower GPA but the personal qualities I mentioned above, a student therefore likely to bring something back not just to American society generally, but possibly to an ailing community, it seems to me the socially responsible thing to admit the unusual Black candidate over the usual Asian candidate – for the possible positive impact on K-12 black education. Committees are sitting around together, sharing/comparing/discussing, after several of them read the same application materials. They have a sense of the pattern of the apps as a whole, including those in the final stages.</p>

<p>I have never heard the phrase “Yale or jail.” No one that I have met has heard it either. However, LACs tend not to be as well-funded for financial aid as larger U’s are, particularly the Ivies, which are the most generous of all. An impoverished student of any race would do better to concentrate (if there’s a realistic chance) on Ivies + certain public U’s than on places like Vassar. But lots of Catholic U’s and LAC’s are not particularly generous, nor is NYU or U of Chicago. I would encourage a very capable but very impoverished student to concentrate on the generous institutions, which would include the Ivies but not be limited to them. It would include any in-State public with a strong need-aid orientation & budget. When I counsel students about college choices I particularly encourage students who can afford this, and who need to divesify their list, to include the LAC’s, particularly those out of their area that are looking for better geographical balance.</p>

271

<p>I love the word I just accidentally made up there. (Deficitis = the disease of deficits.)</p>

272

<p>Fab:</p>

<p>
[quote]
I say it is absolutely wrong to discriminate against Blacks. You agree with me when you say that the answer is clearly No! This question received a simple answer.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The first is an ideal at the MACRO level.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But, when we change one word, it becomes too complicated. This isn't Fermat's Last Theorem. It's a very simple yes or no question.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The second question, with respect to selective college admissions using a holistic approach, is a MICRO level issue that is impacted by MACRO level practices. I don't have a problem with using ethnicity when considering any applicant at the MICRO level.</p>

<p>Since Blacks (and other groups) at the MACRO level are not usually discriminated 'for', but against, my answer at the MACRO level, the ideal, is a resounding NO. That the activties at the MACRO level are controlled by those in power, the ideal would be that they not discriminate against Blacks (and other URM and women). </p>

<p>As for changing one word, it does change how the question is asked because at the MACRO level nothing whould change for the majority, but at the MICRO level it also reduces the chances for all other groups (including Asians). Words and context does matter. Hence the definitional difference between ethnicity and race...not the same, although many use it to mean the same.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But, if you won't answer that question, then please answer me this: Should Whites, Asians, and Hispanics be discriminated for?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, white individuals are (at the MICRO and MACRO level) in a favored position by virtue of being able to set the norms. Other whites (outside the norm) at the MACRO level still have some power by virtue of their ethnicity/appearance that coinsides with the norm. Low-income and rural white applicants are sometimes discriminated 'for' at the MICRO level in college admissions. While some low-income, first-generation, Southeast Asians are discriminated 'for' at the MICRO level, as are some Hispanics. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I support using test scores as a top factor. Who benefits? Anyone who earned high scores.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That is true. Those that do not would be at a disadvantage. Thus, a kid from a poor family, living in an under-represented rural area would be PUNISHED for his or her circumstance (MICRO). Southeast Asians would be found lacking at the MACRO level. The list goes on and on. By weighing test scores more heavily, and moving away from a holitic college selection process, the winners would be those that have the income, political power, and define social norms. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Does this benefit the East Asian with an 1800 SAT score? Only if he scored better than most of his peers in the pool.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would say that it depends. Being that East Asians have the HIGHEST per capita income (MACRO), I'd say that it is somwhat fair if all else in their applications are the same. If a low-income individual (of any ethnicity) scores the same, then they should get a bump.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Does this benefit the Black with a 2400 SAT score? Considering that it's 2400/2400, yes, yes it does.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would say that it depends on what other information is in their complete application, as well as if the college (like many public universities) uses test scores and grades as cut-offs rather than a holistic apprach to admissions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, I fail to see how extending preference based on race reduces the funding gap, prevents redistricting, and destroys stereotypes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It does not reduce/affect those pre-college issues, since (as you've pointed out) those in the majority who voted get to set the norms, as well as choose representation that would have the power to change legislation. Just changing the selective college process does not change the underlying attitudes of discrimination, stereotypes, improve funding of public schools, or treat the gap between weathy public schools versus low-income schools adequately, etc...</p>

<p>It would perpetuating what is happening at the pre-college level, to also deny a URM, that may have face discrimination at the pre-college level, to lock them out of a college because of a single-sitting test score because the process is not holistic or does not consider other factors as important.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Poverty can affect anyone. It doesn't care what color its victim is. Under your system, you'd have to determine what's more damaging - being a rich Black or a poor White.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Being Black at the MACRO level is more difficult than being white (through group affiliation), since some people draw conclusions based on appearances that don't put them comfortably in the norm. At the MICRO level, in a competitive and holistic college process, the low-income white should get the bump and, depending on what else is in his or her file, the Black student should also get one (or not).</p>

<p>
[quote]
The first person might have had "built-in downward pressures" and feels that his country "disowns him" while the second person probably grew up with limited financial resources. What's worse? Do you know if the first person in fact has these mysterious "built-in downward pressures" and feels "un-American"?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The downward pressure comes from society (MACRO), where the majority sets the norms (whether socially, politically, economically, et al.). As for feeling 'disowned' I'm not sure. I'll have to ask my affluent Black, Hispanic, Asian, and White friends. My guess is that if one is successful in the US, they are less likely to feel 'disowned', though they still may be a bit disatisfied with their treatment by others outside where they chose to make a home. </p>

<p>
[quote]
But, you do know that the second person grew up poor, and his being White had nothing to do with it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I understand that. I also understand that by looking like the majority, he/she does have some power, at least when compared to a low-income Hispanic/Black/Asian kid.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Tell me why I should judge a person by his race.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, its ethnicity, rather than race that concerns me. And, it is neither my place or yours to judge individuals in a selective and holistic college process. Colleges make judgement calls, even when it is based on gpa and test score cut-offs (public schools) without consideration of pre-college issues. Thus, the latter is discriminating against those whose circumstances at both the MACRO and MICRO level may have affected an aspect or aspects of their application. See your own example of the poor, white person. If the poor white scores lower than the affluent URM, then he is left without support in the test score biased process. At least with the holistic process, he'll have a decent chance.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Tell me why I should trust a system that prefers certain races over others.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not sure you should trust any MACRO system. Tip O'Neil said, 'All politics is local." Nor, do I believe you should trust most MICRO systems. In the US, since the system is controlled by the majority, their wants and needs do affect what is seen as the norm for all--despite social, economic, political, familial differences in other groups. Just look at recent history, say 1850-present. It's about gaining power so you can set the agenda. Witness the party that is in control of Congress. Witness what will happen with Obama and Clinton in the 2008 election. Who ever is in control will change/modify/affect where the country (MACRO) is going based on legislation, discretionary and non-descretionary policies, etc...</p>

<p>
[quote]
Tell me how extending preference to certain races makes them stronger candidates.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The use of ethnicity in a holistic college selection process, by itself does not make any individual stronger. It's a combination of factors. Even preferences for low-income kids does not by itself make them stronger candidates, but taken along with other factors present in their application, it can help them to gain admission. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Does it result in higher scores?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Does using the holistic college admissions process raise scores? It's a bit like wagging the dog...since at the pre-college level, the majority dictates funding for public entities, it should be at that level that inequity should be fought against. That at the pre-college level it does not (see articles posted), it has been made the responsibility of the colleges. Can a college, by itself, raise pre-college test scores? NO.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Stronger essays?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not sure, as I would have to have specific example for comparison. And, I would have to assume that a single-sitting, timed verbal test is the best indication of a strong essay. It is not. So the answer is that it depends, different experiences may lead to a unique perspective. Or, it may not.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Deeper community involvement?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, I would need to see many applications of students before I could make a claim, either for or against. I would also need to know if the applicant needed to work, if he or she had family duties, if the school system required community involvement, if the student was bussed, what the commute time to activities were,etc... That is why having a HS profile is sometimes helpful. It may or may not lead to deeper community commitment, as individuals are motivated by different experiences, situations, etc...</p>

<p>
[quote]
No. No. And, no.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm surprised that you can be so sure of the last two. At the MICRO level, many things affect our daily and long term decisions. Availability with respect to schools, courses, ECs, work, etc...affect many things, including education. No policy or program at the college level can, by itself, rectify the inequity sometimes seen during a selective and holistic college process--since it is the tail end of the dog. While colleges do have some power as a whole (MACRO), they can only do what is in their immediate power (MICRO), to accept/waitlist/deny an applicant after a holistic view is taken of their lives at present. Other schools use a gpa and test score cut-off, or % rule, to choose students. I prefer the former, while you prefer the latter.</p>

273

<p>IsleBoy,</p>

<p>Since you are keen on using your economics background, I’ll mention a very fundamental principle of economics. People respond to incentives.</p>

<p>By telling a group that they are preferred on account of their race, you are removing their incentive to work harder. If a student knows that his lower stats will be offset by his “leadership potential” and “charm,” then why should he spend that extra five minutes reading Tolstoy when he can watch television? You reduced his marginal propensity to study.</p>

<p>Also, I didn’t ask you whether Whites are being discriminated for. I asked you whether they should be discriminated for. I gave you a normative question, but you answered a positive question. Which is a debate tactic! Yay, points for you!</p>

<p>You asked me what the difference is between my ideas and Drosselmeier’s. I don’t think I’m taking his posts out of context when I state that he has consistently supported racial preferences for Blacks. Who benefits under the policy he supports? Blacks. Who benefits under a policy that places test scores as a top factor? Anyone who scores well. This anyone could be Black. He could be Asian. He could be Hispanic. He could be White. Thus, emphasis on test scores is open to anyone who scores well, but Drosselmeier’s racial preferences are open only to Blacks (and Native Americans, to be fair).</p>

<p>Once again, here at CC, all students are advised to have a list that includes safeties, matches, and reaches. I highly doubt that a Black applicant who has colleges from all three categories will be denied admission to every single one.</p>

<p>Indeed, this seems to be the fear of race-blind admissions. Blacks will simply be “left out.” Where’s the supporting data? Tell me how they were left out when after 1996, more Blacks are enrolled throughout the UC system than before. Were they “left out”? No.</p>

274

<p>epiphany,</p>

<p>First off, thank you for taking the time to address my questions and concerns. I do appreciate it.</p>

<p>Based on what I understood from the first post, there are cultural differences between Blacks and Asians, and some of these differences are significant. I acknowledge this.</p>

<p>Yet, I do not see how group preferences can make a culture more supportive of education. You mentioned the example of the Chicago alum. I do not personally know him. For all I know, he could very well have been admitted to Chicago by his merits and his essays. If he encourages your student to work harder to reach a goal, hey – I’m all for that.</p>

<p>But, racial preferences do not encourage the beneficiary groups to work harder. They are told that they are preferred. The incentive to work harder has been removed.</p>

<p>I didn’t really like your statement “But if Blacks can be asked to have high test scores, then Asians can asked to show strong personal qualities.” Apples to oranges comparison, to use your terms. I believe that anyone can prepare for the SAT. I absolutely don’t buy the “cultural irrelevance” and “biased” excuses. Yet, I do not believe that a person who has been quiet for much of her life can suddenly become more outgoing because she’s been asked to do so. You’re not asking her to spend five more minutes doing a math problem. You’re asking her to change who she is. </p>

<p>I’ll assume that by 100-point you meant 1.00-point. I tell you what. Let’s attach some numbers for sake of argument. Let’s assume that the student’s weighted GPA is 4.00, his SAT scores are 2150, and he has taken all the APs his school offers and has made at least a 4 on all them (some 5s). In addition, he dedicated himself to a community activity for several years. Last but not least, he wrote essays that made him stand out. I think this student can be admitted by his own merits to just about all the schools that we Asians are advised to add to our college lists. He’s good, why should his race make him unusual?</p>

<p>Now, let’s change those numbers up a bit. Let’s assume that his weighted GPA is 5.00, his SAT scores are 2400, and he has taken all the APs his school offers and scored all 5s. He dedicated himself to a community activity for several years. His essays were stellar and written from the heart. Should this student be admitted to the elite colleges? Yes. Why? He’s REALLY good! That’s all that matters! Why is he unusual because of his race? All I see is an outstanding student with great work ethic and civic duty.</p>

<p>I got the phrase “Yale or jail” from Dr. Thomas Sowell, by the way.</p>

275

<p>Fab:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Since you are keen on using your economics background, I’ll mention a very fundamental principle of economics. People respond to incentives.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, depending on whether you are speaking of the macro- or microeconomic level, response to incentives can be elastic or inelastic, depending on the structure of the arguement and what framework you use.</p>

<p>
[quote]
By telling a group that they are preferred on account of their race, you are removing their incentive to work harder. If a student knows that his lower stats will be offset by his “leadership potential” and “charm,” then why should he spend that extra five minutes reading Tolstoy when he can watch television? You reduced his marginal propensity to study.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'll bite. By the same reasoning, where one concentrates on testing in the college admissions process, why would an individual take the extra 5 minutes to contribute to his or her community, work on his interpersonal skills, focus on a personal essay, look for a professor to write a rec, develope a special talent, et al.? It reduced the marginal propensity to develope as a person, outside of a single-sitting, multiple choice test.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, I didn’t ask you whether Whites are being discriminated for. I asked you whether they should be discriminated for.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The reality is that they are discriminated 'for', since they are in the majority. If you are asking me, in THEORY, whether this should be the REALITY, then I would answer in the negative.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I gave you a normative question, but you answered a positive question. Which is a debate tactic! Yay, points for you!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thus, you are making judgements at the macro level about different groups, rather than making micro judgements based on the individual.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You asked me what the difference is between my ideas and Drosselmeier’s. I don’t think I’m taking his posts out of context when I state that he has consistently supported racial preferences for Blacks. Who benefits under the policy he supports? Blacks. </p>

<p>Actually, I believe he uses Blacks as an example. He would, to an extent, also include women and some other URM groups.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Who benefits under a policy that places test scores as a top factor? Anyone who scores well. This anyone could be Black. He could be Asian. He could be Hispanic. He could be White. Thus, emphasis on test scores is open to anyone who scores well, but Drosselmeier’s racial preferences are open only to Blacks (and Native Americans, to be fair).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This does not recognize the circumstances of each applicant. It assumes access, funding, opportunities at the pre-college level are similar. They are not (see above articles).</p>

<p>
[quote]
Once again, here at CC, all students are advised to have a list that includes safeties, matches, and reaches. I highly doubt that a Black applicant who has colleges from all three categories will be denied admission to every single one.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It is also highly doubtful that any applicant would be denied by all his or her colleges, if they have a range of schools.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Indeed, this seems to be the fear of race-blind admissions. Blacks will simply be “left out.” Where’s the supporting data? Tell me how they were left out when after 1996, more Blacks are enrolled throughout the UC system than before. Were they “left out”? No.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They were not left out in CA because of the 10% rule, a quota. See article above about the University of Florida. See UTexas data. So your fix is to use a quota system based on class rank. How is that any different than any other quota system?</p>

276

<p>Fab:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yet, I do not believe that a person who has been quiet for much of her life can suddenly become more outgoing because she’s been asked to do so. You’re not asking her to spend five more minutes doing a math problem. You’re asking her to change who she is.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, with college preparation, as well as with interpersonal communication, practice and work is required. Here you assume that an Asian candidate fits the stereotype, and want a break on their personal qualities and characteristics--yet you do not want to recognize pre-college issues that other URM groups face disproportionately.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I got the phrase “Yale or jail” from Dr. Thomas Sowell, by the way.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>He has a particular quote is self-serving, given his stance, as well as his need to sell books to maintain his economic status.</p>

277

<p>yea it sucks to be asian</p>

278

<p>I actually like being part East Asian...</p>

<p>Has not hurt me at the micro level...but it could be due to me being able to 'pass' for a non-minority.</p>

279

<p>IsleBoy,</p>

<p>Given that Drosselmeier demands reparations for the legacies of slavery and segregation, I don't think that he is simply using his race as an example.</p>

<p>Answers to your questions,</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Why would an individual take an extra five minutes to contribute to his community as opposed to reading a book? It is possible that he considered his opportunity cost. He figured that he can read the book at any time, but he likes to volunteer in the afternoon.</p></li>
<li><p>Work on his interpersonal skills? Again, opportunity cost. He figured that he can do an integration problem at any time, but he likes to relax with his friends in the evening.</p></li>
<li><p>Look for a teacher to write a recommendation? Opportunity cost once more. He figured that he can do a draft of his essay when he gets home, but he's already at school, so why not ask that teacher then and there?</p></li>
<li><p>Develop a special talent? Opportunity cost yet again. He figured that his best photos all come from the wee hours of the morning, and he considers his optimal study time at 6:00 PM.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Thank you for answering my question. Yes, both of us agree that Whites should not be discriminated for. I take this one step further and state that no group should be discriminated for.</p>

<p>Since we both doubt that the chances of an applicant being denied to every college on her list is slim to none, why believe that Blacks will be "left out" under a race-blind system?</p>

<p>Also, I did not know that California practiced a 10% program similar to Texas. Are you sure about that? A Google search with keywords 10% California Affirmative Action came up with no program, but replacing California with Texas produced instant hits that described Texas's program.</p>

<p>You may have misunderstood my statements. I support no such quota. Besides, California doesn't have a Top 10% rule. I don't know where you came up with that.</p>

<p>For a person who believes that Blacks will be left out if their race is considered, you might want to consider the fact that after California abolished racial preferences, Black enrollment at UC Riverside shot up 240%. Who got left behind, again?</p>

<p><a href="http://www.examiner.com/a-383258%7EEducation_after_affirmative_action.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.examiner.com/a-383258~Education_after_affirmative_action.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>That article is the source of my number, and I think you should read it. The data shows that the "left behind" fear is quite unfounded.</p>

280

<p>Fab:</p>

<p>You are answering your own questions. Here is my response to the questions you ask:</p>

<p>
[quote]
1. Why would an individual take an extra five minutes to contribute to his community as opposed to spending 5 minutes reading a book? It is possible that he considered his opportunity cost. He figured that he can read the book at any time, but he likes to volunteer in the afternoon.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, in macroeconomics, opportunity costs are not the only issues that are considered at the aggregate. Thus, the marginal utility of a behavior depends on the context. And, opportunity costs are usually not zero sum.</p>

<p>

[/quote]
2. Work on his interpersonal skills? Again, opportunity cost. He figured that he can do an integration problem at any time, but he likes to relax with his friends in the evening.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The opposite is also true. BTW, interpersonal skills involve more than relaxing with friends.</p>

<p>
[quote]
3. Look for a teacher to write a recommendation? Opportunity cost once more. He figured that he can do a draft of his essay when he gets home, but he's already at school, so why not ask that teacher then and there?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>He could do the same by taking time to consider who he/she believes will give him/her the best recommendation possible. In your construct, he/she is choosing expediance over the quality of his/her recommendation, which can hurt him/her in the selective, holistic college process.</p>

<p>
[quote]
4. Develop a special talent? Opportunity cost yet again. He figured that his best photos all come from the wee hours of the morning, and he considers his optimal study time at 6:00 PM.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, if his best photos come in the wee hours, then his optimal time to study photography is not 6:00PM. Opportunity cost is never a zero sum game. Thus a college admissions process biased towards test scores, over a holitic practice, is more dicriminatory to those who do not score as highly (especially if they also need to overcome pre-college issues or factors). </p>

<p>
[quote]
Thank you for answering my question. Yes, both of us agree that Whites should not be discriminated for.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, we do agree on this point.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I take this one step further and state that no group should be discriminated for.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I also agree with your statement as an ideal. Where we differ is what the effects will be in the real world by just focusing on test scores that do not consider income, gender, ethnicity et al. Equality will not result by using test scores without context at the micro level. It would simply mimic the pre-college pattern with respect to funding, access, etc...</p>

<p>
[quote]
Since we both doubt that the chances of an applicant being denied to every college on her list is slim to none, why believe that Blacks will be "left out" under a race-blind system?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, as I said, my concern is ethnicity, not race. And, I do not believe that Blacks (hispanics, women, etc...) will be left out in a holistic admissions process. I do, however, believe that using test scores as the primary determinant in selective college admissions WOULD be left out. </p>

<p>Race-blind, is not race neutral (in practice), as the majority defines what the norm is. Gender-blind, is not gender neutral (in practice), as those who are in power determine what acceptable practices are and are not. Income-blind, is not income-neutral (in practice), as the majority sets the norm.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, I did not know that California practiced a 10% program similar to Texas. Are you sure about that? A Google search with keywords 10% California Affirmative Action came up with no program, but replacing California with Texas produced instant hits that described Texas's program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It should be 12.5% (which was ammended in 2002 to top 4%)...Here's the UC requirements:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Eligibility criteria: UC requires students to complete a specified number of academic courses in high school, called the "a-f/g" subjects. The university then uses a numerical index, consisting of standardized test scores and grades in these UC-required courses, to determine a student's "eligibility" for the UC system. Eligibility guarantees a student admission to at least one UC campus, though not necessarily his or her campus of choice. The university uses this eligibility model to ensure that we offer access to the top 12.5 percent of California high school graduates, as designated in the state Master Plan for Higher Education. </p>

<p>Eligibility in the Local Context program: The fall 2002 admission cycle is the second in which UC will be offering an additional route to achieving UC eligibility, beyond the statewide eligibility criteria mentioned above. The Eligibility in the Local Context program grants UC eligibility to the top 4 percent of students in each California high school, based on their grades in UC-required courses. UC makes this determination based on the evaluation of student transcripts forwarded to UC by individual high schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sounds like a points based system...</p>

<p>
[quote]
You may have misunderstood my statements. I support no such quota. Besides, California doesn't have a Top 10% rule. I don't know where you came up with that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, it was 12.5% before 2002. UC keeps modifying its points based system. See above.</p>

<p>
[quote]
For a person who believes that Blacks will be left out if their race is considered, you might want to consider the fact that after California abolished racial preferences, Black enrollment at UC Riverside shot up 240%.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Here's an answer that from the 28 October 2006 Monterey Hearld:</p>

<p>
[quote]
UC stopped considering race in undergraduate admissions in 1998, a change that resulted in steep declines in black and Hispanic admissions, especially at the Berkeley and UCLA campuses. The numbers gradually recovered and are now higher than 1997 levels systemwide, but the change has not been uniform, with fewer blacks and Hispanics at the top campuses.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So all CA residents should also be happy to go to UC-Riverside no matter their ethnicity.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Who got left behind, again?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, and Asians who wanted to attend UCB and UCLA.</p>

<p>
[quote]
That article is the source of my number, and I think you should read it. The data shows that the "left behind" fear is quite unfounded.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Here's an answer that:</p>

<p>Monterey Hearld
28 October 2006</p>

<p>
[quote]
UC stopped considering race in undergraduate admissions in 1998, a change that resulted in steep declines in black and Hispanic admissions, especially at the Berkeley and UCLA campuses. The numbers gradually recovered and are now higher than 1997 levels systemwide, but the change has not been uniform, with fewer blacks and Hispanics at the top campuses.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>As well as from the article you posted:</p>

<p>
[quote]
It is true that after Prop. 209 went into effect, as opponents had predicted, black and Hispanic populations at California’s two most elite universities — Berkeley and UCLA — dropped by nearly half and have never fully recovered. According to admissions data, between 1995 and 2004, black admissions to Berkeley dropped from 6.66 percent to 3.59 percent and Hispanics from 17 to 10.22 percent. UCLA reported similar drops.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>and:</p>

<p>
[quote]
But what about the spots vacated by blacks and Hispanics at the elite universities? At Berkeley, it turns out most have gone to Asians, whose enrollment has risen from 38 percent in 1995 to about 46 percent in 2004. At UCLA, they have been split between whites and Asians.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That is not surprising, since the UC's are test score and grade driven, even when looking at the top 4-12.5%. As for some of the assumptions the writer made regarding elite college admissions practices, the article makes several assumtions, that have yet to be proven one way or another.</p>

<p>Also see: <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2001/04/02/daily27.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2001/04/02/daily27.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And, as to being discriminatory based on religion, see: <a href="http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/29/131217/794%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/29/131217/794&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And: <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/etc/ucb.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/etc/ucb.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And, remember that the UC's discriminate against out-of-state applicants, even though they get federal finding.</p>

<p>Oppertunity cost with respect to the UC's, UTexas, UFlorida, etc...is a compromise, not a zero sum game. If it is allowable for a public entity to discriminate against some applicants by virtue of their home state, I would definately want schools to be able to use holistic admissions when selecting a first-year class.</p>

<p>Again, I don't have a problem with public schools using tests and grades primarily, because I simply have no power (because I cannot vote in the state). I do, however, have a problem with forcing selective private colleges to use a process (like the UCs, UTexas, UMichigan, UFlorida) that does not usually consider applicants holistically, since it perpetuate the inequity that is present at the pre-college level. See UFlorida article from NYT. If state residents are okay with discrimination, I cannot change it. But forcing private schools to move from a holistic process to a numbers driven process by court interference is unsatisfactory.</p>