<p>Ethnicity is not a fact. It is a constantly changing, multifaceted aspect of one's personality that can embody itself in myriad and variegated ways. I really wanted to be black one day, and I went to Africa and studied their ways. I identified with the African culture, and wanted to live it. But then I went to Mexico, and found out that I really liked Mexican culture. I think learning about cultures and being multicultural is more important than designated yourself as one single culture. You're only Asian or Jewish or Black if you really believe you are. MINDS CAN BREAK RACIAL BARRIERS!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
<p>Mr Payne,</p>
<p>my argument is not that AA is less bad that athletic recruiting. my argument is that many people decry AA as gross reverse discrimination keeping America's talented ORMs out of schools they deserve to go to. However, the real culprits in denying spots to more qualified students are athletes, legacies, and the wealthy, not AA.</p>
<p>hotpiece</p>
<p>Ok back to original topic for a second, I'm biracial, my birth certificate says black, I look white. In an interview they would hate me, because they would think I lied ab race to get in.</p>
<p>And I've known two girls to go to Harvard, both african american, one made an almost perfect grade on the SAT and was a concert violist, the other took 8 AP classes, had a part time job, a 32 on the ACT and so much more. AA has no grip at Harvard because competition is so intense. Blacks have a 15% acceptance rate compared to a 9% overall, in the skeem of things your hypothetically looking at getting into Penn(15%) versus Harvard(9%). If you get in, you get in, and it's probs not because of your race.</p>
<p>
[quote]
my argument is not that AA is less bad that athletic recruiting. my argument is that many people decry AA as gross reverse discrimination keeping America's talented ORMs out of schools they deserve to go to. However, the real culprits in denying spots to more qualified students are athletes, legacies, and the wealthy, not AA.
[/quote]
Basically, you just said that it's less bad. AA probably has an effect on other applicants.</p>
<p>I have a theory. Top Ivies basically setup a blueprint:
50-65% - white
15-20% - black & hispanic (total, not each)
15-20% - asian
5-10% - misc.</p>
<p>Something to that effect. Wealthy/Legacy/Athlete applicants are independent of this initial distribution. Meaning, 5 wealthy applicants who are white compete only with whites. So yes, wealthy whites prevent other merely upper-middle class whites from being accepted. It just doesn't affect the actual distribution of race at the university.</p>
<p>Mr Payne,</p>
<p>I'm not saying AA is less bad. I'm saying AA happens less frequently than athletic recruiting and legacy acceptance and wealthy donations.</p>
<p>hotpiece</p>
<p>Well, haha, you can always say that you are half African-American (essentially you are because you are the American half) lol</p>
<p>The athletic recruits I have seen tend to be much less qualified than the general student population. They tend to be overwhelmingly in the "easier" majors, and self-aggregate, forming their own little subset of the student body.</p>
<p>mr_sanguine,</p>
<p>it seems that we have made the same observations. the athletes i know are in the easier majors and take the easier classes. and they do have their own subculture. it's sorta sad.</p>
<p>hotpiece</p>
<p>
[quote]
An asian, with a 2400 and 3 800s in SAT IIs can, and does get rejected from Harvard (with poor ECs). In fact, I'd think it's common. I'd be ultra surprised if any black student gets rejected from an Ivy with the same stats. The qualifications to get into an Ivy between asians and blacks, hispanics (and even whites) are significant and measurable.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Simple reason for this. The number of >2300 black students in the US is an incredibly small number, especially compared to the white and Asian populations. High-scoring black students make up a small segment of the population, and colleges admit them because of their rarity. </p>
<p>journey495:
I'm not exactly convinced by your argument. You state that you're opposed to AA because "it hurt [sic] minorities." You're arguing that a large reason why it hurts these minorities is because they won't be perceived as strong as other candidates.
Forgive me, but I don't see where this is coming at all. I'll only briefly mention the first fault I find with your argument--while it's all very well and good for some people to "worry" about the minorities' egos, it's foolish to assume that their egos supersede their education. Find me 10 people who HONESTLY would refuse admission to school that they love because of their egos. Maybe after you do that, you'll have made a point.
This whole assumption that they'll be viewed as less qualified is just silly as well. Forget about admissions--the true test of competence comes at the school itself. If a student is, in fact, "qualified"--this is by your standards--for a school, it'll show in the transcript and research and professor recommendations.
The "perception of this as a reality" is also nonsense. Employers oftentimes strive for the same objectives as colleges--they aim for diverse workplaces as well. Of course, racism is still inherent in society today, but I think you're blowing it up, and in the process advocating something that'd HURT those you're trying to help.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Simple reason for this. The number of >2300 black students in the US is an incredibly small number, especially compared to the white and Asian populations. High-scoring black students make up a small segment of the population, and colleges admit them because of their rarity.
[/quote]
You're preaching to the choir. Everyone knows why colleges do this. It's still a double standard between similarly spec'd asians or whites.</p>
<p>So you're saying everyone should be evaluated on the exact same scale, regardless of how unique their circumstances are?
What about the example that pro-AA activists bring up so very often? What about the students who come from areas whose public schools don't offer APs? The student who self-studies and receives a couple 3s, 4s, and 5s on the tests certainly is distinguished, but objectively worse than the above-average student from Exeter/Andover.
The connection is a bit tenuous here, I'll admit, but I hope you get the gist of what I'm talking about. Accomplishments are all relative, and it's a bit silly to consider anything otherwise.</p>
<p>Yeah, and in those cases a program based on socioeconomic diversity would be most beneficial, not one based on race.</p>
<p>Attempting to revive this thread! I agree with mr_sanguine about creating a program based on socioeconomic diversity instead of race, BUT in most cases, the two are totally interrelated, which is why I think Affirmative Action works in the first place. But of course there are those many cases in which for example, a black or Mexican student who is super rich is accepted based on their race and not their socioeconomic status and there's nothing anyone can do but say "oh well" and curse their gene pool.</p>
<p>MY question is (I've already posted this on another thread but I need more opinions): since I am half Korean/half Hispanic (Dominican Republican), do you think my HALF Hispanic status will actually give me the "URM-boost" that I'll probably need? I mean...I'm not very Asian, in the sense that I despise math and science and I'm not a nerd (haha, way to stereotype, right?) but I AM the President of Asia Club and do Korean Fan Dance. I barely have any ECs related to Hispanic culture other than Spanish Club and Spanish Honor Society.</p>
<p>Another thing about the SCOTUS: Chief Justice Roberts subscribes to the "minimalist" school of judicial rulings, where a narrow ruling is issued to make the decision more clear (i.e. get more than 5 votes). I don't know that this has gone into practice so far, but it could limit the effects of the new composition of the court. But, that said, I would have a huge party the day AA died nationwide, and in fact the referendum in Michigan that ended it there this year was the highlight of the -06 elections IMHO.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Attempting to revive this thread! I agree with mr_sanguine about creating a program based on socioeconomic diversity instead of race, BUT in most cases, the two are totally interrelated, which is why I think Affirmative Action works in the first place. But of course there are those many cases in which for example, a black or Mexican student who is super rich is accepted based on their race and not their socioeconomic status and there's nothing anyone can do but say "oh well" and curse their gene pool.
[/quote]
Actually, socioeconomic affirmative action heavily favors whites and asians. A look at the NYC magnets show this to be true quite clearly. Despite blacks and hispanics being the 1st & 2nd largest pluralities, they are relegated to extremely small percentages.</p>
<p>No, you cannot. Even though The Supreme Court ruled on the case, they still ask for it on your application. Like someone said, it's like lying about your SAT score. And if you agree that it has no weight on your application, then why would you do it? Let's pretend that we live in a world where URMs and athletes receive no boost on their application. You wouldn't put that down now, would you, if everything was equal? Exactly.</p>
<p>I just wanted to make a point about socioeconomic AA which most users on CC bring up as a possible solution to the current problems regarding race and college admissions. Socioeconomic AA would absolutely NOT WORK because colleges/universities would have to begin taking income/finances into account when determining admissions decisions and abandon their prior need-blind positions towards domestic applicants. Many will say this is great because now that white kid from rural Kentucky will have his/her rightful admissions advantage over the less or similarily quaified black student from Andover, but these individuals would be completely ignoring the flip-side of this scenario.</p>
<p>Among Asians and Jews especially, one can find after perusing statistics that parental income level and financial assets have almost no correlation with student academic achievment due to the ingrained culture in these races that promote educational values. Therefore, colleges will look more highly upon low-income Jewish and Asian students, most of which are just as qualified as their high-income counterparts, and therefore high-income Asians and Jews WILL SUFFER EXPONENTIALLY MORE than they are in the existing system. Asians and Jews whose parents earn 100K+ would have to kiss any hopes of an Ivy League educations away unless they are academic/extracurricular demigods with socioeconomic AA in place.</p>
<p>Guys/girls, give Affirmative action some more time as it is a temporary program put into place to correct the inequalities suffered by and past abuses committed against historically disadvantaged races like African Americans. It will end soon enough and we will all discover that it has actaully accomplished nothing.</p>
<p>In the end, blacks will still be the majority population in American prisons, occupy the least-paid American job positions, and still have graduation rates from high school/college that will still be shockingly low when compared to other races.</p>
<p>In order for social change to actually occur, it will take a conscientious change in mindset among the African American population as a whole regarding the importance of education and the debunking of the drug/drinking culture that has landed them in the position that they now find themselves in.</p>
<p>Amen to the last part evil_asian. But I don't think that socioeconomic AA would have the negative effects on Asians and Jews that you think it would. Furthermore, socioecnomic AA could take the form that it now holds: colleges evaluate in a "need-blind" manner, but when they can tell a student is disadvantaged from the school he attends or essays or other information, they take it consideration. They wouldn't necessarily need to know that Johny's parents make $15,000 a year if it's pretty clear he's disadvantaged elsewhere in the application.</p>
<p>Or here's another idea, and call me crazy here: admit people on merit? Oh wait, no, we wouldn't want to do that!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maybe that's not the way that people intend to come across when they start threads saying MY GRANDFATHER LIVED IN AFRICA FOR ONE MONTH ON SAFARI AND MY MOM WAS BORN THERE DURING THAT SAFARI, THAT MAKES ME AFRICAN-AMERICAN RIGHT?!, but it sure seems that way.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>ROFLLMAOLOL..</p>
<p>The reason why I believe Affirmative Action is evil (as according to Hobbes):</p>
<p>1) Affirmative Action doesn't benefit Asian
2) I'm Asian (as in me, not Hobbes)
3) AA doesn't benefit me
4) Only the stuff that benefits me is good for me.
5) Affirmative Action is not good for me.
6) I must reject all that is not good for me or else it will harm me.
7) I must reject Affirmative Action.</p>
<p>The end.</p>
<p>Let just be real of why we hate Affirmative Action. Don't bother with the fancy rhetoric about equality and craps.</p>