<p>Just to clarify, it's the "us versus them" mentality the OP has taken up that is the root of racial tensions and controversy. That's probably the main point of absurdity in his post, in my opinion.</p>
<p>Good point, rence.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just to clarify, it's the "us versus them" mentality the OP has taken up that is the root of racial tensions and controversy. That's probably the main point of absurdity in his post, in my opinion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Fair point, but what is leading to the us vs. them? I believe it is the fact that we are still dividing ourselves along racial lines through programs like affirmative action. I know some of you view it as a corrective measure, but I am not sure that it is anymore. Martin Luther King Jr. (boy am I going to get flamed for this) dreamed of a nation where we were equal, where there weren't these racial boundaries but rather we could all be brothers and sisters. We can get there, but at some point, we have to get rid of affirmative action to get there. Agree?</p>
<p>If that is the case, and I think it has to be the case, then why not now? We are still going to give an advantage to those who have been disadvantaged, we just aren't going to assume that being a minority is a disadvantage. I just don't see why not.</p>
<p>So, I guess there are two points to debate if anyone wants to take this point on. 1. can we truly be equal with AA and 2. what is wrong with just aiding those who have been disadvantaged instead of assuming that race tells the whole story?</p>
<p>I believe that affirmative action has merits in holistic admissions and that modifications do need to be made so that those who are "race-distinguishable" are hand-picked from less than desirable socio-economic circumstances.</p>
<p>But however you cut it, the "us versus them" mentality is clearly developing from the OPs own frustrations. Not from a flawed system. Not out of protest for the good of all white applicants. But from his own insecurities and the need to blame <em>someone</em>. And choosing minorities as his scapegoats only solidifies what can be implied: his post was immature and selfish, through and through.</p>
<p>I'm not agitated with his opinion. I'm agitated with how he came to arrive at his opinion. Ignorance at its finest!</p>
<p>haha mojojojo69 types like some 12 yr old girl on AOL. I agree with Irish68178 all AA does is seperate us even more. Racism will never stop until we stop classifying as a certain color or race.</p>
<p>"I doubt most informed whites, like myself, would say that Affirmative Action is racism."</p>
<p>Spare me... So anyone who disagrees with you is simply misinformed or uninformed? </p>
<p>I can tell you one thing, Princess... There are still, no doubt, a lot of racial issues in this country, but this country is working on it. Racial issues aren't going to be solved without conversation that involves all sides--including those of folks not in the minority. Deriding those with differing viewpoints as lacking your own perceived "informed" status only exacerbates the problem, helping no one...minorities included.</p>
<p>transferstudentt, i dont know what your deal is with aol...did someone rape you in AOL or something and thats why you hate it so much? And its separate, idiot. Also, learn how to type coherent sentences biiootch</p>
<p>Okay, the thread just lost its validity. I call for a close.</p>
<p>ddjones007,
I didn't mean that everyone who disagress with me is uninformed. However, the objections to affirmative action being spewed on this board are so overused they're frustrating. </p>
<p>Also, I can't believe that you're satisfied with the "progress" that we're making in this country. By accepting that our country is "working on it" we are making the same mistakes that our ancestors made in the past. Does "all deliberate speed" from Brown v. Board ring a bell? </p>
<p>I could argue point for point with everyone else on this issue for hours, but I don't think any of our opinions will change. What it boils down to is that Notre Dame, a university that stands for social justice, adheres to the principles of Affirmative Action and is dedicated to diversity. I am proud to attend a university that recognizes and understands the issues faced by minority communities in our society and also understands that bringing these voices to campus makes us all aware of injustice and empowers us to act. If that means that we accept someone with a lower SAT score but with a perspective that needs to be heard, I don't care, because that person's presence is enriching mine and others' education. Why would Notre Dame want to accept a bunch of white kids with perfect SAT scores but no life experiences? Don't get me wrong, I am for diversity in the truest sense of the word, but I that in the case of racial diversity--because of the unique stigma or race--AA is morally justified. Whether it should be expanded to include others (gays, etc) is a different question. </p>
<p>With regard to the point that someone made about AA not helping poor whites, I'd like to bring up the facts of the Michigan case. While underrepresented minorities were given 20 points in their admissions process, students from poor backgrounds were given 16 points (if you were a minority and were awarded the 20 points, you couldn't qualify for these) and those from the "upper peninsula region" were given 10 points. Therefore, if you were a poor white person from the upper peninsula of Michigan, you could get 26 points, more than the number of points awarded to minorities. The media didn't report on this, however. (From the book Affirmative Action by Tim Wise)</p>
<p>Fair point on UMich, but how were they to assess who was a poor white student if they couldn't see the student's FAFSA (I believe they are need-blind). Also, that means that minority students from the UP got 30 points, so I am not sure the UP stat gives us much. I appreciate the use of a source though, that is refreshing.</p>
<p>A few points still stand in my mind that I wish you would take the time to address. 1. can we become colorblind if we have affirmative action? You are complaining about the speed of racial integration in this country but it seems to many of us that AA is only exacerbating the problem. 2. let's say that Michael Jordan's son, who probably went to private school all the way and had more opportunities in life already than I can dream of, wanted to go to UMich. Based on what you have posted, he would be given more preference points than a poor white student because he was at more of a disadvantage...but why? I know I don't know what it is like to be a minority, I can't, but I can't wrap my mind around this.</p>
<p>As for ND, this will sound bad, but I am not as much against the preference at this point as I am the size of the preference. Thinking back to some of the results from this year, as well as some of the students I know here, the difference in stats is enormous. A few of you know the statistic (that is now a few years old) that if you are a white student who is not a legacy the average SAT is a 1495. That is almost surely over 1500 now. I know people have had it harder than me, I understand that, but this worries me because it means that it is almost impossible for people like me to go to Notre Dame. I like to think I am a smart guy, I am graduating from Notre Dame with high honors, but I was never going to score a 1500 on my SAT. Yet, I have friends that got in with 1100s. That is too big of a gap for me. I could maybe see one standard deviation (about 100 points) but right now I think we are way beyond that.</p>
<p>I don't know, maybe I am a bad person, we will see what you think, but that is how I see it.</p>
<p>Irish,
I'm not from Michigan, so I can't be positive about this, but a friend of mine has told me there aren't many minorities up there. It is largely poor, white communities. You can estimate a family's socioeconomic standing by looking at the neighborhood the student comes from, the school/district they were educated in, as well as their parent's occupations. Fafsa is not required and often doesn't tell the whole story. </p>
<p>I would argue that we can't be color-blind either with or without AA. Yes, AA is a race-conscious policy, but we live in a race conscious society. Denying that hurts minorities. It's easy for whites, who are at an advantage, to say "do away with Affirmative Action", but it's the minorities who will suffer. The hope, of course, is that if we provide enough access for minorities and educate everyone about how race affects experience, we will transform our society so that race is insignificant in the future. Of course, like any public social policy it is a flawed system, but what else do you propose? Fix up the schools? Who would pay for that? Figures place the cost of equalizing the school system at 50 billion dollars. And then how long do we give minorities to catch up? Pushing for meritocracy assumes that everyone starts on the same line. Do they? </p>
<p>Second, I hate how everyone uses the example of the rich kid who benefits from AA, especially when over 80% of ND's minority students are first generation college students. Yes there are wealthy kids who benefit, but they are so insignificant that they almost don't matter. Looking at the few who get in from this is distracting you from the many who do benefit, rightfully so, from AA. Also, wealthy minorities aren't admitted because they're disadvantaged, they're admitted because they bring diversity. Growing up a wealthy minority in a white, homogenous community is a unique experience, especially because so few minorities, as I have alluded to before, actually live this type of life. I know from speaking to one of my best friends from home who is hispanic in our all-white neighborhood that she's experienced so much discrimination during her life and has always felt isolated because of her race. </p>
<p>Also, nationally there is a huge of discrepancy in the SAT scores between whites and underrepresented minorities, even when factors such as income, geography etc. are adjusted for. I can't help but wonder if this tool, which is supposed to be race-neutral, isn't a huge part of the problem. Maybe the problem is with the test itself, not the students taking it. Maybe we should question how we evaluate candidates, not simply the gap in scores, which I think is terribly misleading and unfair. </p>
<p>Finally, I've never met a person (who wasn't an athlete) who had a score in the 1100's at Notre Dame. I just wanted to say that. ;)</p>
<p>aa just makes whites and asians even more racist toward blacks</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not from Michigan, so I can't be positive about this, but a friend of mine has told me there aren't many minorities up there. It is largely poor, white communities. You can estimate a family's socioeconomic standing by looking at the neighborhood the student comes from, the school/district they were educated in, as well as their parent's occupations. Fafsa is not required and often doesn't tell the whole story.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But what about a national university like Notre Dame. I suppose you may have a sense, but can they really know everyone's SES just from their address? Maybe, but that seems like a big task. I just don't see students getting a bump right now for SES, but I could be wrong on that...it is hard to tell SES on these boards.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Fix up the schools? Who would pay for that? Figures place the cost of equalizing the school system at 50 billion dollars. And then how long do we give minorities to catch up? Pushing for meritocracy assumes that everyone starts on the same line. Do they?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Fixing the schools is a good place to start, and my tax dollars could pay for that. I don't think it would cost much if done right. I am very conservative here, I believe in private school vouchers, which give lower SES students the opportunity to go to private schools and also brings competition into the equation so public schools must perform to keep their students. I am a big believer in market forces. I do NOT believe solely in meritocracy, but I believe it is a place to start. Assume meritocracy but, once again, look at each individual on a case-by-case basis. That is just how I see it, and I know we will probably have to agree to disagree, but that is alright.</p>
<p>As for the rich kid example, I have a couple points. Even if this is only a small segment of the problem, it is still a small segment that is fixed with my plan, which I think is progress. The others would still receive some benefit for SES and, perhaps, because they do increase diversity. Diversity is more than just race though, and honestly I have known minorities who are as "white" as non-minorities and would admit to this. I don't think being a minority automatically means you increase diversity, if that makes sense. Speaking of which, random topic, I wonder why people have never complained of historically black colleges. If diversity is so great, they really are missing out! Just a random thought. I do think diversity is good, but I am not one of those students who would use it to decide where I go to college.</p>
<p>I am not a fan of standardized testing, so I agree with you on the SAT. I think it is overweighted in admissions. I have never understood why one day of testing is worth more than an entire transcript of grades in some cases!</p>
<p>And lastly, I can actually think of a few people with scores of 1100, though I obviously won't name names. People know I like admissions though so they are quick to tell me their SAT scores, as weird as that is. They are out there!</p>
<p>FLORIDASTUDENT: I agree</p>
<p>I'm not disputing, Princess, that there are still racial issues. I think, however, that to continue to lay fault for all that ails the underclass on some sort of unfair advantage inherent in white America is to displace some of the responsibility from where it really needs to be assigned. There is a growing chorus of African-Americans in particular, who are stepping up and speaking out against the complacency of blame, rather than taking on the challenge of personal responsibility.</p>
<p>And, while I don't believe the problem of race relations and inequalities in this country have been solves, I am convinced, having seen how the rest of the world tends to deal with their minority populations, that the US is making and is continuing to make a good faith effort in this regard.</p>
<p>Florida student,
Speak for yourself. That is the problem of those people, not those who receive Affirmative Action. Anyone who feels "cheated" will have a sour stomach. They need to cry a river, build a bridge, and get over it. (And so does take the cake)</p>
<p>I lost alot of respect reading this thread for some of the posters here. I'm starting to wonder as an admitted minority do people on campus feel we haven't "earned" or are stealing someone else's spot.
:(</p>
<p>
[quote]
I lost alot of respect reading this thread for some of the posters here. I'm starting to wonder as an admitted minority do people on campus feel we haven't "earned" or are stealing someone else's spot.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I apologize if you have lost respect for me, and I wish to clarify some things in case you have. First of all, try not to judge people based on this thread, just like you wouldn't judge someone based on their political orientation. A lot of these questions are political in nature and it is alright to have a different view. I have personally PMed several people in this thread telling them that while I may disagree with them, I still very much respect them and value them as being important to the board. Unfortunately very few have reciprocated that, but nonetheless, try not to judge people on this thread, or the gays at ND thread, or any where politics shine through because they may just see the world differently than you. </p>
<p>As for if admitted minorities have earned their spot at ND, absolutely, they got an acceptance letter from ND and have done everything asked of them. I don't want you to feel in any way that I am taking away from your accomplishment, and I believe the vast majority of minorities here would still be accepted if we changed AA to the way I am proposing. You do not get into ND if you cannot have the intelligence and skill to thrive here, period. I don't care what race you are.</p>
<p>I wasn't as clear on this second point as I should have been...did you steal someone's spot? No. What I will say is that I believe right now it is too hard for a non-minority student without a hook to get into Notre Dame. It seriously may be easier to get into many Ivy League schools for such a student than it is to get into ND, and that worries me, because there are a lot of really good students who are being excluded. There are many ways to rectify this other than just AA. For instance, here are two which directly apply to me, just so I am fair...legacy and transfer admissions. I will be an alum in a few weeks, so legacy will benefit my children (hopefully). We could reduce how much legacy helps and hence accept more students without a hook. Also, we accept around 150 transfers a year due to how ND is setup with the first year of studies, which is a ton compared to our peer schools. If we eliminated FYS, we could accept about 150 more students per year, but at the same time limit transfers to about 10. </p>
<p>There are other solutions, and we can debate those. I am just saying that without a hook I think it is too hard to get into ND right now, and I believe that perhaps we are giving AA too much of a benefit and I question if we should have it at all. While it may look like it, I am not questioning if you are stealing someone's spot. Technically, if you want to get down to it, I stole someone's spot on the waitlist because we have FYS so their spot went towards a transfer filling an unfilled major instead of to them.</p>
<p>Dear students, I happened into this site b/c am home today and was just curious how the excellent debaters from ND today would handle such a difficult, challenging issue.
I only want to add a few points from an historical perspective (I'm nearly 60, I claim it, I own it!!) that I perceived you missed, only b/c you live in the times you live. I'm impressed that you struggle with ethical issues and personalize them. In case you want to add these to your discussion:</p>
<ol>
<li>That you could even imagine "rich minorities" is new. There has only been a black middle-class of any size for around 30 years to even speak of. </li>
</ol>
<p>(Long-winded boomer story follows; if you don't like those, just skip it:</p>
<p>When I began college, which is the year Martin Luther King was assasinated (1968, yes you all knew it..), the all-girls' public school I attended (no mistype) was 50% black, 50% white but before there was ever bussing to create this. It happened by the free marketplace. It was downtown in a big city, a magnet for honors open to anyone who'd try a bit harder. I had to take 3 public busses to get there, as it was convenient for NOBODY. No boys, so no fun. But if you wanted academics and would forego the convenience and coed fun (dances, etc) at your nearby neighborhood school, then this was your school choice.
So, it was 50-50 black/white (hardly any Latinos lived in that city, so I'm not overgeneralizing here to say black), and pulled from every class in the city. I was accustomed to girlfriends from every economic background, every neighborhood of the city, and both races (I'm white.)
BUT, at college admissions time, the GC black students in my classes were told to apply to Morgan State Teachers College, the state college or community colleges. Morgan if they wanted private, b/c it was historically black, nearby and they'd get in. Of all those girls, a friend of mine with the tippy-top stats (near 800's) said "NO, I want to apply to Radcliffe." (At the time, Harvard was still all-boys so that was like a girl saying today she wanted to try for Harvard. Radcliffe was the "sister-school" to Harvard; now they are one.) The GC said, "no, Radcliffe's not for you, you'll never get in there." She applied without her GC and got in, had a great career.<br>
You can't imagine this happening today, when top schools are seeking out outstanding as well as promising minorities, especially from urban downtown areas like this school represented.
AHA, you'll say, she demonstrated outstanding qualifications; she was merit-worthy. But I'd say what happened to all the others at the high school? Because there was no opportunity (real or imagined), their families and the GC all steered them away from top private colleges or even middling private colleges.
Opportunity creates imagination in kids. If you've heard you have NO chance to be accepted by NASA to fly to the moon, why bother to even write an application. But if you hear it's possible, you might try.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Class difference provides diversity within a race, too. AdComs can pick out poverty among white applicants by reading between-the-lines. Also, the AdComs are highly experienced at reading so many of these and following up as the class shows up on campus each year.
For example someone here suggested a hypothetical "white applicant from the upper peninsula of Michigan." IF the applicant's parents are doctors serving a small rural town, their home life resembles that of a suburban doctor's family, in terms of books/art inside the home, vacations taken, etc. The difference is they go to a roaring dull h.s., so that's kind of a challenge to negotiate life as a social minority, even while achieving and priveleged, so while it's not a disadvantage (some would say it's an advantage), even this applicant has a story to tell. But better, if the white rural peninsula's applicant has a dad who works in a mine up there and mom stacking shelves at the grocery store, well, then you do have diversity even with white skin. It's not hard to read between-the-lines and put together a picture from the app. If the applicant's EC's are all about summer classes at Interlochen that's different than h.s. summers spent working locally at minimum wage, no bells or whistles or August trips at the end of the summer, either. Who would add more to the campus life is really the question, but either candidate offers diversity from the white suburban doctors' kid. </p></li>
<li><p>I'm too long-winded here. My apologies. </p></li>
<li><p>Closing with: the difference about the hypothetical "Michael Jordan's kid" is that as soon as he walks into a convenience store and nobody knows whose kid he is, he is most likely to be followed around warily by the security-minded cashier concerned about shoplifting or burglary. At the end of the day, he processes all the weird comments people have made to him based upon race that he didn't invite. Racism is exhausting to the soul, and that's the part that no white person can ever "get" IMHO. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>I think it's a drag to have to debate this iwth an adult, but I wanted to add these ideas so you can bat them about, if you wish to. I won't repost.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is that minorities have had to struggle historically to get to the place that a small percentage are today. Whites were never oppressed and forced out of their lives into slavery. African-americans, and other minorities as well, have been at a disadvantage for a very, very long time.
White students(I'm not saying all, but many) have a leg up on all aspects of education (There are quite a few minorities who also do, myself being one of those). Many white students can afford tutoring for the SATs, glowing reccommendations from top notch teachers, from top notch high schools, summer programs, etc., They have had for their entire lives a leg up, and an easier route to get to where they want to be.
My belief is that, while priviliged white students get all this extra attention and opportunity which does give them an advantage in the "college/life race", minority students should have affirmative action to rely on. If we eliminated affirmative action, there would be alot fewer minority students in higher education throughout the country because they are starting at an even lower point. Affirmative action is trying to give an equal playing field, which history has ruled out for aleast another decade or two or three.
And for those people who are complaining that a "less qualified" minortity "took their spot". Have you ever considered that universities not only consider grades, but also who you are as a person, life struggles, etc.,
Many people are taking into consideration, that they don't know what it's like to be a minority. And I commend you for recognizing that. But like smithlazers said" I'm starting to wonder as an admitted minority do people on campus feel we haven't "earned" or are stealing someone else's spot." In a world where racism is still very prevalent, we have to fight even harder to get to where we are/ try to be.<br>
What some people are trying to argue is what is currently occuring in admissions withing male and female acceptances. Many articles, publications, speeches, etc., have been made about the decline of male qualifications. Having to deny a much better female candidate to a male, simply because he is male. Men have no excuse for the decline in work ethic/ whatever it is that's happening, because for all time men have been the leaders and rulers. I don't think that this type of "affirmative action" for men is appropriate because nothing has ever happened to them. This seems to be what some people are arguing.
So from that perspective, I'm sorry that we couldn't help but be forced into slavery. I'm sorry that we have been shoved down the social ladder for a long, long time. Now that we are beginning to get the opportunity we are trying to recover, and slowely but surely we will.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Have you ever considered that universities not only consider grades, but also who you are as a person, life struggles, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is an important part of your argument, and I want to focus on it. I don't mean to blow the rest of the argument off, and I understand your points, but I think this is worthwhile. </p>
<p>I completely agree with brb's quote above, colleges should look at the whole person, including their struggles, in admissions decisions. I completely agree. Here is the problem...what do I know about a person just by their race. What do you know about me knowing that I am white? Do you know my struggles? Do you know my background? Do you really know anything about me? There are stereotypes, but the last thing we want to do is further those, because they simply are often untrue. So tell me, what can you tell by my race? You don't even know my sex, let alone anything which can help you decide if I am a good fit for your college.</p>
<p>So why are we giving the color of one's skin so much power? I believe we should look at what people have been through, what opportunities they have had, and how they have either survived or thrived. That tells us about the person and tells us if they fit at our school. We are still correcting for injustices which may have been done, because we are looking at the student as a whole. We just aren't assuming things based on the color of their skin.</p>
<p>Is there still some racism in America, sure, and maybe that should be accounted for some...but there is much more to the story than that. I am much more than just my race, and I personally would rather be judged by where I have come from than my race. Why? Because race tells you little.</p>