<p>MODERATOR'S NOTE: </p>
<p>Thread closed with redirect to the current FAQ and discussion thread on this forum </p>
<p>with more general and up-to-date discussion of this issue. </p>
<p>Isn't it true that being black improves your chances of being admitted to selective colleges (affirmative action)?</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure this is correct, right?</p>
<p>um.. i guess</p>
<p>yes, it's called affirmative action and it goes for most minorities.</p>
<p>Are black applicants less qualified because they as a group tend to have lower SAT scores than other other ethnic groups? I don't think so. I think the SAT tests only your ability to prepare for and take a test. It is in no way indicative of academic potential, which I assume is the basis on which all applicants are accepted (regardless of color). </p>
<p>IMO, people who believe that scoring well on the SAT is or should be THE deciding factor in college admissions need to get over themselves. However, if you want to discuss this matter, there are a bunch of threads on here that express racial paranoia that is similar to yours. You have 312 posts, you ought to know how to use the search function. </p>
<p>Sorry if I come off rude, but I am just so tired of these questions.</p>
<p>its a yes or no question, does being black help you gain admission to selective colleges?</p>
<p>its affirmative action</p>
<p>
<p>its affirmative action
</p>
<p>Had you omitted the second paragraph in your original post, it would have been a yes or no question. However, because you had the desire to imply that black applicants who benefit from affirmative action somehow are less qualified on the basis of lower average test scores, you made this a discussion about the fairness of affirmative action and about standardized tests as indicators of academic potential.</p>
<p>Aren't being a Native better?</p>
<p>ok, no more second paragraph w/e</p>
<p>"I think the SAT tests only your ability to prepare for and take a test. It is in no way indicative of academic potential, which I assume is the basis on which all applicants are accepted (regardless of color)."</p>
<p>There is a lot of statistical evidence that counterracts your claims. SAT scores correllate fairly well to freshmen grades in college. </p>
<p>File:1995-SAT-Income2.png</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</p>
<p>Also, if you observe this chart, you will see that whites in the 0-10k income category outperform blacks in the 70k+ category. Which group had more opportunity for test preparation?</p>
<p>Yeah, I'm quite sure that being a Native American, Hispanic, or black helps a lot.</p>
<p>so, the general consensus is that being black improves your chances of admissions to sleective colleges due to affirmative action?</p>
<p>It wasn't a yes or a no question- it was a rhetorical question.</p>
<p>To single out a URM and inquire about their chances is indeed racism. As Swedefish pointed out, you have enough posts to know better and understand the concept of URM.</p>
<p>Also, you're not taking into account socio-economic diversity which is becoming as important as cultural diversity. I do know colleges earn more government funds for low income admits and that may be one of the factors that contribute to the increased recognition.</p>
<p>And, I'm not even sure affirmative action exists anymore. That's such a 70's term. It sounds outdated if nothing else.</p>
<p>Has anyone else noticed that since the economy has been in the tank and tensions are high that there has been more racism in general - jews, blacks, asians, muslims, etc? It hasn't only been on CC...I've noticed it in a number of online boards.</p>
<p>I'd say that admitting a black applicant instead of a more qualified white or Asian simply because the black applicant is a black minority is true racism.</p>
<p>It's sad. I mean, don't we all want the USA to be colorblind society, where people aren't judged because of their skin color?</p>
<p>yeah, you're right, "socioeconomic affirmative action" is a good idea. IF a student is poor and has to spend his time working to support his family, he ought to be given a helping hand.</p>
<p>it's no less fair than other aspects of the process. i equate being a URM to being a legacy. students are simply born into them by chance, with no effort on their part, and yet both help admissions.</p>
<p>
<p>Also, if you observe this chart, you will see that whites in the 0-10k income category outperform blacks in the 70k+ category. Like it or not, different races score differently on the SAT(look at the high Asian scores, for example).
</p>
<p>Yes, but the chart does not tell us whether or not the SAT measures properly academic potential in college. </p>
<p>This article (USATODAY.com</a> - Despite new version, SAT still faces questions of survival) contains some quotes addressing my point:</p>
<p>
[Quote]
Bates studies have found SAT-submitting applicants and non-submitters are virtually indistinguishable once they get on campus, separated by .05 points of GPA and one-tenth of one percent in graduation rates.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>
[Quote]
A University of California study similarly found after SAT II scores and high school GPA were considered, scores on the main SAT exams provided little additional predictive value regarding college performance.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>ya thats true being a legacy improves your chances of admissions as well</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thank you for this comment. I have been very disturbed by this, but I never made the explicit connection to the ailing economy. It is sad how it takes so little for all that suppressed racism to manifest itself. Particularly, it is depressing to read these discussions in a forum primarily populated by supposedly intelligent people, such as CC. Perhaps these posters aren't all that bright after all... Perhaps they're just good testers?</p>
<p>I'd say that admitting a black applicant instead of a more qualified white or Asian simply because the black applicant is a black minority is true racism.</p>
<p>It's sad. I mean, don't we all want the USA to be colorblind society, where people aren't judged because of their skin color?</p>
<p>What are you are interpreting as "racism" is actually just frustration at this unfairness.</p>
<p>theendusputrid: You're missing the point here. You have not defined what "being more qualified" entails. Universities decide which qualifications matter in their admissions processes. If they decide that overcoming social stigmas and economic inequalities is to be weighted heavier than SAT scores, then one cannot claim that high scoring Asians or whites are more qualified than, e.g. blacks or native students who have managed to succeed in school despite the difficulty of doing so in their specific contexts. </p>
<p>Furthermore, the U.S. isn't a colorblind society, which is why certain ethnic groups historically were excluded from higher education and consequently from opportunities to succeed.</p>
