<p>I still have this hope that the thread won't just degenerate and die on a bad note. The info in the OP was very interesting to me. It shows a real issue with SAT scores and college admissions for URM's.</p>
<p>There is a line, a technical line, in terms of the online code of conduct that you can't cross. Patriotboy's post may be more insulting, but actually calling someone stupid is the post that crosses the line. :)</p>
<p>I agree, perhaps there should be more preference given to disadvantaged families of all races, rather than just giving preference to certain races under the assumption that they are disadvantaged (I mean this in a financial sense). Though I don't think it can be argued with that there is a very significant difference in the financial situations of certain races as groups and this is the reason they are given preference. Practically speaking it is easier to ask for race on an application than a detailed financial history. There's also the question of diversity. Personally I'd rather go to a school that reduced it's "admission standards" to admit a diversified (in more ways than just race) body, than go to school with a more homogenous make-up. I think it's a better experience and helps everyone out in the long-run. AA really is a service to society.</p>
<p>On the subject of SATs, I think the difference in scores is less of a "bias" and more that it just reallys doesn't measure apptitude like it claims, it measures achievement. Kids who have access to a better education will be higher achievers and usually these are kids with more money, and usually kids with more money are not minorities. So that is a problem with the test, though I think it's still a good measure of how well you've done in school/intelligence to an extent and is therefore a valid measurement in college admissions. That problem does however I think allow for the justification of admitting miniorities who have lower scores. </p>
<p>But honestly I don't think prep courses really help all that much. I took a prep course and for my first practice test (which i took before actually beginning the course) I scored higher than I did on the actual exam, though only by ten points, so really it didn't change me at all. Might have made me a little more comfortable or something. The Writing section however is abomindable and hurts minorities(aka those who are disadvantaged) even more than the old SAT did with it's focus on writing (if you can call those horid essays prompts writing samples) and grammer rules that are so so so obviously not measures of ability and can easily be taught to anyone who can learn that when the word "both" is used so is the word "and", etc.</p>
<p>In short, the SAT has it's problems, especially with minority testers, and this is one of the reasons AA is valid, the other being that it's just good for society.</p>
<p>You can view the full report, which gives various reasons to support why their is this disadvantage, though some of the reasons are disginuous. </p>
<p>If you go down to Explaining the Black-White SAT Gap. Some points that are made:[ul]</p>
<h2>[li]Blacks are not adequately schooled: Public schools in many neighborhoods with large black populations are underfunded, inadequately staffed, and ill equipped to provide the same quality of secondary education that is offered in predominantly white suburban school districts. </h2>[/li]
<h2>[li]Black students who take the SAT have not followed the same academic track as white students:It is true that 97 percent of both blacks and whites who take the SAT have studied algebra in high school. But in higher level mathematics courses such as trigonometry and calculus, whites hold a large lead. In 2005, 47 percent of white SAT test takers had taken trigonometry in high school compared to 35 percent of black test takers. Some 28 percent of white test takers had taken calculus in high school. Only 14 percent of black students had taken calculus, one half as many as whites. Thirty-two percent of white SAT test takers had taken honors courses in mathematics compared to 19 percent of black SAT test takers. </h2>[/li]
<h2>[li]Whites, who are more likely to attend high-quality schools, have simply achieved a greater mastery of the subject matter than have blacks:whites are far more likely than blacks to have taken honors courses in science and social studies. Given the huge differences in course study between black and white high school students, it comes as no surprise that white SAT scores are significantly higher than black SAT scores.</h2>[/li]
<h2>[li]The late John Ogbu, professor of anthropology at Berkeley, believed that broad cultural attributes among blacks such as parental style, commitment to learning, and work ethic bear a heavy responsibility for the black-white educational gap. Ogbu wrote in his recent book, Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement, that black students in the affluent homes of doctors and lawyers are looking at rappers in ghettos as their role models. Students talk the talk about what it takes to be a good student, Ogbu wrote, but few put forth the effort required to get good grades. This type of behavior is typical, Ogbu said, of racial minorities adapting to oppression and the lack of opportunity. Ogbu, much as Bill Cosby has done recently, also placed the blame on black parents. He believed that many black parents are not offering sufficient guidance, do not spend enough time helping with homework, and do not pay adequate attention to their children's educational progress. </h2>[/li]
<p>[*]School administrators and guidance counselors often believe that black students are less capable and less able to learn. They routinely track black students at an early age into vocational training or into a curriculum that is not college preparatory. Black students are rarely recommended for inclusion in gifted education, honors, or Advanced Placement programs. Once placed on the slow academic track, most black kids can never escape. By the time black students are juniors and seniors in high school, they are typically so far behind their white counterparts in the critical subject areas necessary to perform well on standardized tests that they have little hope of ever matching the scores of whites on the SAT. [/ul]</p>
<p>^ Many stats sited in the post above mine are racist by definition. </p>
<p>The problem we're having here is with communication. When people say "black" and "white" in the context of the above post, what they really mean is "poor" and "rich". Saying "black" and "white" implies that blacks are not adequately schooled BECAUSE they are black, which is untrue. Many blacks are not adequately schooled because many blacks are poor. Rich blacks are just as likely to be well-schooled as rich whites, and poor whites are just as likely to be inadequately schooled as poor blacks.</p>
<p>This reminds me of what Kanye West said after Hurricaine Katrina: "President Bush does not care about black people"--wrong, Mr. West; Bush does not care about poor people.</p>
<p>Nobody is arguing that college admissions are fair or that all children have the same opportunity to succeed. I'm simply arguing that race is no basis to decide who has and hasn't had those opportunities. </p>
<p>If colleges want to come out and admit that they practice affirmative action because they want a diverse freshmen class (which is a crock in itself--diversity has nothing to do with people looking different from one another, and where is it written that all colleges must exactly mirror the racial percentages of the outside world?), then I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it.</p>
<hr>
<p>On a seperate note:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The late John Ogbu, professor of anthropology at Berkeley, believed that broad cultural attributes among blacks such as parental style, commitment to learning, and work ethic bear a heavy responsibility for the black-white educational gap. Ogbu wrote in his recent book, Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement, that black students in the affluent homes of doctors and lawyers are looking at rappers in ghettos as their role models. Students talk the talk about what it takes to be a good student, Ogbu wrote, but few put forth the effort required to get good grades. This type of behavior is typical, Ogbu said, of racial minorities adapting to oppression and the lack of opportunity. Ogbu, much as Bill Cosby has done recently, also placed the blame on black parents. He believed that many black parents are not offering sufficient guidance, do not spend enough time helping with homework, and do not pay adequate attention to their children's educational progress.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a fascinating point that I believe holds a great deal of validity, though it cannot be applied across the board to say that all blacks have this attitude and all whites do not. I believe, however, that this cultural difference is the reason why asians consistently go on to professional careers while blacks and hispanics lag behind.</p>
<p>I think that many people are overlooking the value in giving boosts to a group that has been put down for so long in very unfair ways. And i do think that race brings diversity- race is often associated with culture, different economic groups, different experiences, etc. Knowing people of other races can be an enlightening and broadening experience and breaks down barriers that still exist. Anyone who contradicts the fact that there are racial barriers must just be choosing not to see them because it makes them uncomfortable. Racial diversity is very important, especially in a country like ours with so many different races and that has a still very recent history of discrimination and intolerance. You can't deny the statistics about black poverty. There is no way that it's natural that such a high percentage of blacks are poor compared to whites- they are poor because they have been discriminated against and pushed to the outskirts of society, and that has happened because they are black. That's a reason for AA. Sure poor whites might have similar disadvantages in education as poor blacks, but injustice is not the explanation and I think its admirable that Universities are trying to do a small part to improve the position of minorities in American society.</p>
<p>Check out this research on the SAT indicating that there is a racial bias in the SAT. There's an article, too, in an Atlantic Monthly by Jay Mathews describing work by the below researcher named "Freedle," but one has to be a member to obtain it on-line. </p>
<p>"Well, now comes a study by Jay Rosner of the Princeton Review Foundation that finds that since the Educational Testing Service, which makes up the SAT, the major test required by college entrance officials, is concerned most of all with the reliability of the test: the majority of the questions in it are geared to 'white preference.'</p>
<p>A reliable question is one on which those who score positively do well in college and those who score negatively do poorly. The Princeton Review Foundation, which helps minority students in taking the test, says that in the 2000 version of the SAT, every one of the 138 questions selected for it favored white students and none favored black students.
A retired Educational Testing Service researcher, Roy A. Freedle, also published an article in the Harvard Educational Review stating that the SAT tests contained racial bias. His point was that black students often do better on more difficult questions than easier ones because easier questions use a common (or "street") vocabulary that can be interpreted differently by different groups according to their cultural experiences. </p>
<p>Most important, Jay Rosner stated that researchers did not know why some questions were more difficult for black students than for white students, but that the testing company knew in advance that there are many more questions that appeared to favor whites than either blacks or Latinos in making up the tests."
<a href="http://www.greaterdiversity.com/education-resources/ed_articles03/New_Study.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.greaterdiversity.com/education-resources/ed_articles03/New_Study.html</a></p>
<p>I think that that report is not very well done. I agree with AA and think the SAT does favor white students, but for different reasons than race bias or culture bias.</p>
<p>The reasons i think that report is not done are as follows: it misuses testing terminology. Reliability refers more to consistency, aka the same test taker scores about the same each time the test is taken, etc. What they really want to examine is the validity of the test, aka if it really measures what it claims to. I don't really trust research that confuses this.</p>
<p>Secondly it is very difficult to prove that the reason whites might have scored better on certain questions than blacks is because it's racially or culturally biased. It could be a variety of reasons, including the possibility that the Standardized Apptitude Test is really an achievement test and whites are better prepared because they have access to better education (I talked about this earlier).</p>
<p>They did not conduct an experiment, yet they are trying to claim conclusive cuase and effect results (aka the test is racially biased and that is why blacks score worse than whites). All they are doing is making assumptions and conjectures. (aka "this could be interpreted differently")This is a major flaw of course.</p>
<p>I just wouldn't believe just any piece of research that is presented, especially one that has such obvious issues.</p>
<p>I wanted to add on to my previous post but they said something about me not being able to edit so i'm posting it here:</p>
<p>... Plus I think that many Universities do still give some preference to whites with lower incomes, I read in Admission Confidential by Rachel Toor, a former Duke admissions officer, that they love first-generation college kids of any race. And those whites that are denied, it's not in favor of a minority who is less qualified than them. There is no comparison. Most colleges don't have formulas that determine who is better than whom. Many colleges reject applicants who are more "qualified" than those they accept for many reasons. I think that saying AA takes away spots from more deserving applicants is silly, first of all because AA admits are a vast minority (duh) and secondly because the logic is skewed and lastly because it's not like a rejected white person can't go somewhere else necessarily. Plus blaming rejections on AA is delusional and a defense mechanizism. I think it's funny no one complains about all the athletes that not only are accepted with muhc much lower scores and grades but are given large amounts of money and benefits. Maybe they think it's fair becuase they have their athletic abilities to offer, and maybe it is... but don't you think diversity is something minorities can bring to a school and is just as valuable if not more valuable than sports?</p>
<p>Also, we must remember that education is still a business. Schools cannot really afford to give preference to all disadvantaged people. I think race is a good place to start though, especially because minorities have extra hurdles that your average poor white person does not have.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think that many people are overlooking the value in giving boosts to a group that has been put down for so long in very unfair ways. And i do think that race brings diversity- race is often associated with culture, different economic groups, different experiences, etc. Knowing people of other races can be an enlightening and broadening experience and breaks down barriers that still exist. Anyone who contradicts the fact that there are racial barriers must just be choosing not to see them because it makes them uncomfortable. Racial diversity is very important, especially in a country like ours with so many different races and that has a still very recent history of discrimination and intolerance. You can't deny the statistics about black poverty. There is no way that it's natural that such a high percentage of blacks are poor compared to whites- they are poor because they have been discriminated against and pushed to the outskirts of society, and that has happened because they are black. That's a reason for AA. Sure poor whites might have similar disadvantages in education as poor blacks, but injustice is not the explanation and I think its admirable that Universities are trying to do a small part to improve the position of minorities in American society.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Really? Becuase
Irish
Catholic
Jew
Atheist
Gay
Asians</p>
<p>havent had to overcome the same struggles. The problem isnt about giving racial minorities a boost, the problem is that many racial minorities want to "blame the white man" for their problems instead of taking a stand.
Neighborhoods
Families
Community
Its just not present in the culture. Go teach at an innercity elementary school, parents indoctrinate their children with that blind hate from an early age, and theres only so much you can do to help others out.</p>
<p>So why dont good teachers teach at minority schools? Becuase more often than not they can't feel safe (and not for racial steroetypes. Here's an example, how do you think my mom felt that after coming to her school to help (in an inner city) we had to ride back in a car that had been beaten around with a bat? If they wanted to steal it they could have, but no they just wanted to express their frustrations on people trying to help. That attitude is what "keeps them down" and its certainly not the "white man's fault", becuase the white man even discriminates amongst white men.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but I'm sure rich whites and especially rich blacks usurped the spots of many better-qualified applicants.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Whose spots? </p>
<p>It's up to the college to decide who gets a place in the freshman class, using the criteria it believes is best for the kind of institution it wants to have. </p>
<p>No one is entitled to a spot, regardless of their stats. You may not agree with their criteria, but it is not up for you to decide whose "spot" it is.</p>
<p>I don't think they have had to overcome the same struggles no. Different ones, yes.</p>
<p>I think your post was rather hypocrytical; you accused them of "hating white men", which is a complete and total and ridiculous generalization and stereotype, and seemed rather hateful yourself.</p>
<p>I'm sorry if you interpreted my comment as being that poor whites are not poor because of injustice because no whites have ever suffered injustice. I did not mean that. I agree that many different types of people have been discriminated against. But I don't think it's so widespread within one group to such a degree to the same extent as it is with groups that do benefit from AA. Also I am skeptical that the groups you mentioned have recieved the same sort of economic disadvantages for so long that groups like blacks and hispanics have. I thought Jews had a reputation (also a stereotype i admit) for being rather wealthy. And I doubt many atheists find it hard to find work because they don't believe in a surpreme being. Just pointing that difference out.</p>
<p>Also, quite honestly, do you really think that the kids beating up your mom's car with a bat are the ones who even apply to college, let alone the more selective schools that people get so angry about AA with?</p>
<p>Your post made me sad.</p>
<p>Cre8tive,</p>
<p>By "ranges" in your Original Post, I take it you mean the 25-75% range?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think your post was rather hypocrytical; you accused them of "hating white men", which is a complete and total and ridiculous generalization and stereotype, and seemed rather hateful yourself.
[/quote]
No actually i accused them of "blaming white men", but if i need a reference to solidify the statement I can bring up Bill Cosby. Minorities as a group need to take a stand to achieve things in society.</p>
<p>Cleaning up your city and town requires the same deal of effort, but now as much as educators try to denounce it, entertainers promote it (not to say that there arent rappers who do have a good message becuase there are). </p>
<p>If blacks as a group want to elevate themselves above their current standing then they need to take a stance as a group to cleanup their own neighborhoods.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, quite honestly, do you really think that the kids beating up your mom's car with a bat are the ones who even apply to college, let alone the more selective schools that people get so angry about AA with?
[/quote]
No, but its a communities inability to make such people feel safe within that atmosphere that affects a schools abilitiy to succeed, which affects other minority students as well. If you ahve the choice to teach in a suburb or the inner city where would you want to go? Realistically, where you felt safe, and inner city schools simply do not provide that for some teachers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also I am skeptical that the groups you mentioned have recieved the same sort of economic disadvantages for so long that groups like blacks and hispanics have.
[/quote]
It doesnt matter if a GROUP statistically has that hardship, becuase a person is an individual who cannot control their race and ethnicity. You cannot fault them for not being a certain race, but only by what that individual experienced. Just as you state hispanics and blacks on average (percentage wise) suffer more economic hardship, and under that reason a economically disadvantaged student should recieve a perk, not simply becuase they are in that group.</p>
<p>BTW You do realize that AA in its current form does not do much to diminish this gap correct? It only allows the rich balcks to get richer and the poor balcks to remain poorer.</p>
<p>.... okay... whatever you say... :P</p>
<p>haha sorry that was immature. Agree to disagree?</p>
<p>ya lets just go with that, want to escape this thread :)</p>
<p>Actually i retract my statement becuase if the world was perfect than schools should reflect the demographic pop in accordance w/ law of large numbers. However it doesn't, and really then you cannot consider someone has taken YOUR spot but that they arent getting as many spots as they should.</p>
<p>Knowing a diverse group is important, and at least in my personal life i think its why Im always open to just about anything before trying it. If you dont have that diversity you dont have that sense of openess and experience which is really too bad. Life's to short to just be about #'s.</p>
<p>BTW AA was never intended to overly correct #'s so that 75% of the pool were minorities, but its really jsut a safeguard to be on the top.</p>
<p>I still reserve my feelings that it should be judged socioeconomically, but honestly it doesnt make a uge difference.</p>
<p>All of this "diversity" makes me want to move to a different country. Somebody called the JBHE report racist.</p>
<p>I break the discussion into two parts. One: Why do URM's have lower test scores and what can be done about it. I think everyone agrees that there are problems in the Black community. The only question is whose fault it is. Two: In the meantime, how do you handle admissions. No matter how you rationalize the reason for the lower scores or whether the colleges are benefiting from "diversity", colleges have to have two different SAT standards, one for whites/asians and another for blacks/hispanics or else they become enclaves of white and asian students.</p>
<p>One approach that might be used is to try to discredit the SAT test. This might be done by claiming a "white" bias in the test. I can NOT see where there can possibly be a bias in the Math portion. There could be a bias in the CR portion but asians probably have a statistically higher chance of having parents who are not native English speakers and they don't seem to be disadvantaged by the test. Another way to discredit the SAT is to suggest that it is not a predictor of success in college/life, and this is possible.</p>
<p>"No matter how you rationalize the reason for the lower scores or whether the colleges are benefiting from "diversity", colleges have to have two different SAT standards, one for whites/asians and another for blacks/hispanics or else they become enclaves of white and asian students.""</p>
<p>And as long as all of the students accepted can do the work at the college, what difference does it make that some students scores are lower? There is only a problem if colleges are accepting students who lack the abiity to do the academic work.</p>
<p>Otherwise, presumably colleges benefit from having all types of students on their campus.</p>
<p>Yes, I agree. And the focus on SAT scores tends to make one momentarily forget that colleges are not basing their decisions primarily on SAT scores. They do care more about the personal characteristics of the applicants than just how well they score on SAT tests, and the SAT scores are not even the main criteria. This is true for all applicants.</p>
<p>(I am not aware of people having a big problem with affirmative action in college admissions. The people who seem upset with it are non-URM's applying to college.)</p>
<p>'And as long as all of the students accepted can do the work at the college, what difference does it make that some students scores are lower? There is only a problem if colleges are accepting students who lack the abiity to do the academic work.'</p>
<p>I guess the difference it makes is that non-URM students who have similar scores and who can clearly "do the work" may not even be considered in the applicant pool because their scores are "too low." We all talk on these boards about having the "stats" to even get a ticket to the lottery. Non-URMs with similar test scores can't even get a ticket.</p>
<p>True...ditto quiltguru.</p>