<p>^We hardly understand the full complexities of AA, so I wouldn't be so forward as to call it "crap".</p>
<p>
[quote]
What bothers me is when schools talk about "Under represented minorities".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But the fact is, they exist... so I'm not really sure why this bothers you.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is the objective of the admissions process to create a mirror of the percentages of race distribution or to admit the most qualified student?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would say that the objective is to create a diverse class of the most qualified students. The facts are, that college is meant to prepare you for the real world. As far as I'm aware, the real world is not comprised only of whites and Asians.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is it like a school is obligated to determine the ethnic composition of its student body for the sake of having one near the national norm?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course they're not mandated by law to do this, but they realize that it's the smart thing to do. There have been numerous studies done that have shown that being in a diverse college environment can have profound effects on one's education. It's also bad PR if a college has a completely homogeneous population. Finally, would YOU want to be a part of a college that looks completely like you? What people must realize is that while Asians may have higher test scores on average than any other race, they have strikingly similar extracurricular interests (often consisting of math, science, and music). Now obviously some are different - but this is the case a majority of the time (sorry, I'm not trying to stereotype, but judging by what I've seen at my 50% asian school and here on CC, I've found this to be very true). So in admitting people of other races, your not only getting diversity of color, but diversity of interest as well - and we ALL need that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Does that mean there are "over represented minorities"?
[/quote]
There are over represented minorities in the admissions process, yes. Many Asians are top college obsessed and this means that many of them push their children to apply to these upper-echelon colleges. Thus, Asians are considered ORMs as far as admissions goes.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Affirmative action is crap.
[/quote]
Judging by the obvious lack of knowledge you've displayed throughout your post, I think that you should become a bit more informed before making statements like this. It makes you seem ignorant :(.</p>
<p>But I still love you! <3</p>
<p>
[quote]
The facts are, that college is meant to prepare you for the real world.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't like these statements, those that begin with "the fact(s) [of the matter] is/are," because you're setting forth the notion that your opinions are indisputably and undoubtedly true.</p>
<p>Anyway, I had been under the impression that WASPs and Jewish people were the leaders and the most successful people in "the real world."</p>
<p>Personally, I can't criticize affirmative action. It kept me out of every Ivy League university, but it got me admitted to all of the best liberal arts colleges. I'm satisfied.</p>
<p>^^Affirmative Action did not keep you out of ivy league universities, that is a blatant ignorant statement. What keep you out, is the same thing that keeps 90%+ students out, you did not have what that college was looking for. </p>
<p>For the sake of likelihood I am going to assume you are white (bc well, most ppl in America are white). So you apply and thousands of other whites and asians and blacks and hispanics.
What did you offer that no one else offered? </p>
<p>If your answer is high test scores, or maybe in depth extra-curriculars, or maybe even volunteering in another country? Point blank, many other people have those exact same things, so why would they admit you?
For that matter why should they admit anyone? Because of the essay. Not to say that yours was bad, but that when it boils down to it if you are an admission officer and you see thousands upon thousands of applications that are the same, the key for admission would probably become which admission packet is different than the rest.</p>
<p>Affirmative Action does not keep anyone out of Yale or Harvard or anywhere else. Let's say that the 120 blacks that Yale admitted were all "underqualified" then that leaves 120 spots left for the appoximately 20,000 or so other applicants. Chances are you still wouldn't get in. But would you be angry if they "stole your spot"?
If anyone kept you out it was the admission officer. Stop blaming affirmative action for a tough break, it makes you appear ignorant.</p>
<p>Eating food, I'm glad you love me either literally or figuratively, but consider this.</p>
<p>"Many Asians are top college obsessed and this means that many of them push their children to apply to these upper-echelon colleges. Thus, Asians are considered ORMs as far as admissions goes."</p>
<p>So what? So we shouldn't reward behavior that produces high levels of performance?</p>
<p>That schools practice some form of normative admissions, that schools pursue diversity for the sake of diversity and not the different viewpoints it is assumed to bring should astound and disappoint people.</p>
<p>I mean, what are we to say? That "real" diversity comes from people who look different? </p>
<p>I reject that notion wholly.</p>
<p>Also, you assumed I'm Asian (I'm not, and I'm not white either....)</p>
<p>If we have affirmative action, let's place merit before race. Then, in cases where race can be correlated with money, and someone with fewer racial based financial advantages does "better" we can start tipping admissions scales.</p>
<p>Merit before anything should be the criteria for admission into a school</p>
<p>^^In terms of diversity, a certian level of diversity of viewpoints is achieved based on race, bc different races have different experiences in life. </p>
<p>But moreover, diversity of interests is something that people seem to disregard. All the high test scores and numerous science awards are accomplishments that warrant recongintion, but a college is not interested in accepting the most qualified, but the most qualified for their class. By that I would wager they would rather accept and asian A: 2170 SAT with indept involvement in visual arts over asian B: 2400 SAT with indepth involvement in science. Because Asian A offers diversity of interests that asian B does not. They are both asian but one is chosen over the other because of diversity. As far as the objective data like SAT score, it really becomes neglible after a certain point so it would not matter if ppl had a 2300 or 2100 really.
Many top colleges "MIT specfically on a blog for admission" said that scores are used to gauge if you can handle it, and once you are in the range they cease to matter.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, you assumed I'm Asian (I'm not, and I'm not white either....)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>hey hey hey, i never said that you were asian.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Anyway, I had been under the impression that WASPs and Jewish people were the leaders and the most successful people in "the real world."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm sorry... I thought everyone was aware that China's economy was going to surpass our own in eminence in the near future. I was pretty sure everyone knew that Japan has one of the strongest economies in the world. Hmm... I guess this wasn't common knowledge?</p>
<p>Affirmative action doesn't mean that a student of color (or a white female for that matter, although I'm not sure how this plays out now a days) "took someone else's spot." That spot never belonged to anyone. You simply didn't get it and someone else did. Period.</p>
<p>Second of all, if schools operate with quotas, as many seem to believe they do, then you don't have to worry about a person of color "stealing your spot" since their spot would never have been yours.</p>
<p>Personally, as I said, a school has no obligation to fill their student body by our criteria. Yes, you THINK it should be one way, but the schools has the final say. It is their student body and they have a goal in mind. Most of them want a diverse student body with high achieving students. As I've said over and over again, qualifications are irrelevant. What does it mean to be "qualified" for a certain school? Okay, you got straight As and a 2400. Does this mean you HAVE to get accepted to every school? Absolutely not. No one is obliged to give you anything simply because you think you deserve it based on your grades. Yeah, it sucks. But that's how it is. </p>
<p>I propose this: If AA was abolished today, what would happen? I would argue that nothing would happen. Schools would still practice de facto AA, if you will. That is, they still want a diverse student body and will still try to get that. So, it's not AA's fault.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If we have affirmative action, let's place merit before race.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My major problem with "merit" is how we go about defining it. Let's not turn merit into a complete numbers game. It's just as ambiguous as race, or even more so. How merit is evaluated is different to different kinds of people (that is why many of us cannot agree on this thread!). So, my <em>guess</em> is that Admissions Officers try to keep an OPEN mind to all possibilities.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I just meant the SAT to be a convenient symbol of one's academic prowess. 1950 doesn't blow any doors down, and the implication is that the student is far from spectacular in other academic facets as well. The SAT discussion isn't really an affirmative action one.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Unfortunately, all we can do is speculate, but let's try to avoid using totalizing language when it comes to something obscure/or uncertain. It rubs the wrong way. And yeah, a 1950 does blow down doors.</p>
<p>hahahaha</p>
<p>It's soooo clear who's black/latino and who isn't.</p>
<p>And with that said, I don't think that anyone arguing against the affirmative (hehe pun) should have ANYTHING to say until they have had family members who attend inner city schools - or at the very least, work with some of these kids.</p>
<p>Only then will I EVER consider the other side of the argument.</p>
<p>
[quote]
hahahaha</p>
<p>It's soooo clear who's black/latino and who isn't.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>^lol, eatingfood! Can you guess what I am?</p>
<p>
[quote]
And with that said, I don't think that anyone arguing against the affirmative (hehe pun) should have ANYTHING to say until they have had family members who attend inner city schools - or at the very least, work with some of these kids.</p>
<p>Only then will I EVER consider the other side of the argument.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I semi agree with you, only I would consider the other side. It helps me understand people better and makes for less confusion (at least for me) no matter how bigoted or leftist/rightist that person sounds to me. Key word is "me". Everything is subjective...</p>
<p>^^ Ditto.</p>
<p>I do agree, that there is an issue with the notion that students of color need the government to get into college/succeed. BUT, in the current education system, as eating food suggests, they do. Plus, AA has moved so far past government based, and into institution-based that I don't think that issue exists any more.</p>
<p>Wait, yeah, I would consider (and by consider I mean hear) the other side of the argument. But they will never "convince" me.</p>
<p>^^Yeah, there is a huge disparity in the high school education system in America. Going to debate tournaments at other schools really opened my eyes to the fact that some schools are bad, and I mean bad to the point where I would never concieve of going to those schools. People really do get the short end of the stick sometime, and they definitely should get some type of AA. But there are also whites and Asians who grow up in these environments, as there are some blacks who grow up on Park Ave.</p>
<p>All I'm saying is I feel like many of the people who try to shoot down the merits of AA are projecting very selfish mentalities... and that makes me sad/reluctant to consider what they're trying to say.</p>
<p>I realize that it's easy for my to support AA because it benefits me, seeing as I am black... but at the same time, I can honestly say that I don't NEED it to get into a respectable college (maybe not Yale or any of the ivy leagues for that matter, but definitely top 20). I support AA (in general... meaning college-based, government-based, and corporate-based) because I think that it's the RIGHT thing... perhaps not permanently, but definitely as things stand at present.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But there are also whites and Asians who grow up in these environments
[/quote]
</p>
<p>hehehhe... I wonder how many?</p>
<p>^^Very true, Dbate, only the opposite happened to me. During debate tournaments, I realized how well off other schools had it.</p>
<p>@eatingfood- Well, you aren't exactly from an inner city school either...</p>
<p>That being said, I am not either, so I really shouldn't complain, but I have lived in an inner-city area, specifically the Bronx. At night there were gunshots and my parents were careful about bringing me out of our immediate area. We actually moved before I started school so that I would be able to grow up in a safer environment. My parents used literally all of their savings to move us to a better neighborhood.</p>
<p>I do have the uptmost appreciation for those who have risen out of that situation and been able to reach some of their potential in such an environment. One of my summer philosophy course teachers 5 years ago was raised in such an environment. He told us of how he had to wear certain colors to avoid gang involvement, how hard it was to be "smart" in school. He went on to earn three degrees from ivy league and ivy league-institutions in biology and philosophy. He is truly one of the most interesting people I've ever met and he has influenced the way I think.</p>
<p>However, what ticks me off is how some other people gain unfairly from the setup. One of my friends from school (in a upper middle/ lower upper class neighborhood) is an "URM" who stands to benefit greatly from her situation. She was born in this neighborhood, and any discrimination she faced, I faced too as an "ORM" that is underrepresented in my area. Her family is just as financially secure, if not moreso, as/than mine, and I'll venture to say that she has had even more opportunities than I did throughout her life. </p>
<p>That is what bothers me.
That being said, I do appreciate different viewpoints. I believe that affirmative action is important, but I believe that it should utilize socioeconomic status as the most important factor.</p>
<p>[edit]
And actually there are a LOT of asians who live in poor neighborhoods. You just don't see them represented at good colleges very often. The asians who end up at good colleges are often those with parents who immigrated for the purpose of education, and thus were at the very top in their country already. They then got at least decent-paying jobs which they used to raise their children to respect education. ie./eg./whatever My parents both came to the US for graduate school. Most of the parents of asian students in chinatown... didn't.</p>
<p>interesting thread...lol</p>
<p>i'm glad i'm not embroiled in this argument. it'd get bad lol. </p>
<p>at least some minds are off the fact that decisions come in 3 weeks :)</p>
<p>haha don't remind us :)</p>
<p>I definitely agree that it is unfair to white students in the same situation as many blacks and other students of color. I do agree that socioeconomic class should be considered, but I'm still unsure whether it should be the primary focus of AA. It should weigh heavily (for example, it makes no sense to me that a very wealthy mediocre black/hispanic/asian student should get a spot over a very deserving poor white student simply because of their race). However, I still think should hold the primary focus. (I haven't quite formulated my opinion on this completely though.)</p>
<p>ugh, princessbell, you had to remind us about "the 15th of December". I was just comfortably forgetting...</p>
<p>:=P</p>