Minorities?

<p>Ctymomteacher,
From what I have read and heard from black peers who had moms who were teachers in the south when schools were desegregated, your experience was unusual.</p>

<p>"Thousands of black teachers were fired when schools were forced to desegregate.
By Greg Toppo
USA Today
May 16, 2004
*
In the spring of 1953, with the Brown v. Board of Education desegregation case pending in the U.S. Supreme Court, Wendell Godwin, superintendent of schools in Topeka, sent letters to black elementary school teachers. Painfully polite, the letters couldn't mask the message: If segregation dies, you will lose your jobs.
"Our Board will proceed on the assumption that the majority of people in Topeka will not want to employ negro teachers next year for White children," he wrote.
A year later, the high court declared segregation unconstitutional. During the next 20 years, thousands of black educators in Topeka and elsewhere lost their jobs. Researchers say the firings decimated the black teaching force, helping set the stage for decades of poor performance by black students.
It's a little-known and unintended consequence of the ruling, but observers say the nation is still paying the price. "By and large, this culture of black teaching died with Brown," says Vanessa Siddle Walker of Emory University, author of "Their Highest Potential: An African American School Community in the Segregated South." <a href="http://www.indystar.com/articles/2/147000-7592-010.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.indystar.com/articles/2/147000-7592-010.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I myself come from a family of educators in that my paternal grandfather, grandmom and her sister all were teachers. The experience that my mom had growing up in the 1920s in a segregated DC was different from what students seem to experience now in schools that are predominantly black.</p>

<p>Parents knew the teachers, and teachers were expected to have high standards. My mom told me that, for example, her h.s. English teacher flunked the entire class, making them all go to summer school. My mom's grammar was flawless. Her English teacher was Miss Cromwell, who was the first black woman to graduate from one of the Seven Sisters schools (I think it was Smith). </p>

<p>My mom never heard of black people saying that being educated was "acting white." From what I can figure out, this is a phenomenon that seems to have begun after the 1950s, when schools were forced to desegregate.</p>

<p>When it comes to Affirmative Action, I do think that we still need it in this country to rectify the centuries in which it was virtually impossible for people here of black African descent to get any kind of education. Even well educated black people have been affected by this because whatever they have managed to accomplish, they probably could have accomplished much more if they and their ancestors had not been so restricted.</p>

<p>For instance, I was a fourth generation college student. This was a wonderful tribute to my ancestors including one who was born a slave and managed somehow to attend Howard. He must have been amazingly brilliant and motivated. I wonder what he might have accomplished if he could have gone to any school in the US, and what he might have accomplished if all jobs had been open to him and he hadn't had to work as a waiter (not an unusual occupation for blacks back then who were fortunate enough to get any kind of higher education). What more might I have done if I had come from a family so well off that I didn't have to work up to 30 hours a week during the school year while I was in college?</p>

<p>Meanwhile, I would like to see far more emphasis placed on remediating the secondary and elementary school systems. While AA at the college level is fine, there are many capable black students who have no chance of college because their secondary and elementary educations are so bad.</p>

<p>Northstarmom:
Can we all agree that what happened in our country prior to the civil rights movement sucked? O.K., move ahead 50 years!! What does your brilliant black husband have to do with proving anything? Where are your critical thinking skills? Guess what, some really crappy teachers existed then, and now,... of all races.... so what. You quote Florida in 1945, that was then, this is now! Anyone around in 1945 is not a parent of any college student now. Then you ask how black parents and grandparents can teach what they do not know..hmmmm.... I think it is called SCHOOL!! Then you state that black teachers were not allowed to teach, only white teachers retained their jobs. When was this? Could it be... like 50 years ago? I went to an integrated high school in the sixties with a black principal and many black teachers. You sound like someone who has not looked critically at the info you are spouting. There was a lot of racism in the pre- civil rights days, but don't you think there isn't a hell of a lot of racism from blacks against whites & asians as well? What do you really know of the history of racism anyway? What do you know of endentured servants, of Irish being considered a different race, of the exploitation of the Chinese, of Italians not being considered white? What do you know of white slavery? Like the Greeks & Romans before them, the Barbarians took (white) slaves. Slavery & racism are horrible, it happened, but what we are talking about is today. You also speak of affirmative action as a way to get African Americans on par with the rest of society, after having their culture destroyed. Well, most white & asian people have had their culture altered as well. Too much is made of retaining one's culture, instead of assimilating into one grand AMERICAN culture where we include the good parts of all of our cultures. Anyway, affirmative action, I agree was necessary in the sixties, and seventies, but not now. It does more of a disservice than anything.<br>
I suggest anyone with any anger towards what happened in our country back then do something now to help out the blacks in the Sudan who are currently being killed and enslaved. Please look up "Sudan, Genocide, & Slavery" on the internet. Final comment on this darn A.A. issue.</p>

<p>Perhaps my experience was unusual. And perhaps it was simply later. If it was unusual, I am heartily sorry for that fact. But if we are to get into for-examples, my experience IS such an example, as is my best friend of 25 years, an African American college professor who is deeply offended by the very notion of affirmative action admissions policies. </p>

<p>All I am saying is that these matters aren't as black and white (levity intended) as we sometimes make them out to be.</p>

<p>Northstarmom,
You prove the point against affirmative action. Wow, 4th generation college student. I don't know any whites or asians that are more than 2nd generation. But I bet you think you son or daughter should get help??? Are you kidding? The only time anyone should benefit from any type of affirmative action help is regardless of color but based on financial hardship, and this is already in place in financial help from colleges.
What colleges need are diversity of opinion, not racial quotas. Some conservative viewpoints would be a welcome change at our colleges. Read Thomas Sowell.</p>

<p>As far as the examples and stats given by Northstarmom as being years ago and so different now, its just not true in our neck of the woods. I grew up and travelled much as an Air Force brat and lived the last 20 years of my life on the west coast. In major cities and small rural towns. My children were born in San Diego, lived in Phoenix, LA, San Francisco, Vegas and Sacramento. We were pretty much exposed to much racial diversity and liberal attitudes. It is all my children knew. And as that they are URM's it would be noticeable to them if it wasn't.</p>

<p>We moved a year ago, to the south. Very south. Very rural, very small town, and yet not far from 3 major universities (40 minutes either direction). What an eye-opening experience. If someone had told me places like this still exist I would not have believed them. Never in a million years. And its not just my kids' high school, but the whole district, the whole area!! Schools, stores, restaurants, any public area and its worse in private. Having grown up on the west coast it is like a slap in the face. A hard slap. My youngest son, now a a high school freshman, was never called the N* word in his life. He has now been called that more times than he can count.</p>

<p>My 3 in high school last year, came home everyday with the most horrible stories. I finally went to the school and watched for myself. It was worse than they described. It's not remember as the Civil War but the War of Northern Aggression. There were no African Americans in my sons' Physics classes nor Pre-calc classes last year and yet 42% of the school is African-American. There are 3 administrative staff members who were are URMs and 2, maybe 3 teachers. In a high school of 1700. The school became intergrated in the late 70's. You would never know it. It's like there are 2 schools on one campus.</p>

<p>And as far as things being black and white, that is exactly how the school lunch room looked on Friday and will again Monday morning. Completely segregated. And yes, it does feel like we have stepped back decades in time.</p>

<p>It has been an experience I would not wish on anyone. I just did not know places like this still exist. Hopefully with time and all those "damn Yankees" moving in, things will change. I think it has started slowly, at the elementary level. At least that is what some of my neighbors with younger children have said.</p>

<p>Kat</p>

<p>remom - </p>

<p>I don't understand what makes me an "arrogant person." I thought on this website people's scores and abilities were freely talked about, and it wasn't considered taboo to reveal your scores/achievements. Can you please clarify what makes me so "arrogant?" And give me an example of how this "arrogance" causes the police to decide and pull me over? Thanks for the help miss!</p>

<p>Yes, Kat, I live in just such a place, too, and we just have to refuse to accept the values of the context we live in. Our family is biracial--black and white as well as gay and straight--and we just sort of ignore the ignorance around us and plow ahead as if it didn't exist. Sure, people get stopped for "driving while Black." But that doesn't stop them from driving. The members of our family who are black just go ahead and do what they want to do and can't worry about the socially disabled. It doesn't pay to stay angry. It just eats away at the one feeling the anger unless there's a constructive outlet available.</p>

<p>It really does work sometimes to "act as if" until what you want happens. Maybe that sounds overly idealistic, but it's worked for some of us in a surprising number of contexts. I know that doesn't ease the pain of seeing your child hurt. Nothing does. I'm sorry you have to live with that. Maybe it's easier for people who have always lived with it.</p>

<p>"But I bet you think you son or daughter should get help???"</p>

<p>I will remind you that when it comes to Affirmative Action, "help" means that if there are two equally qualified persons, the URM will get the job or opportunity. And, yes, if that's what's going on, I would agree with that for my children.</p>

<p>Some people insist on erroneously believing that Affirmative Action is supposed to cause a less qualified person to get a job or opportunity over a more qualified person. However, that is not how it was designed to work.</p>

<p>When it comes to colleges, too, some people keep trying to insist that colleges should only select students in terms of stats: grades, scores and class rank. That kind of system may work in countries like China and France, which have long selected college students that way. That system works for those countries because their colleges are not expected to provide students with the kind of nonacademic enrichment that US colleges are expected to do.</p>

<p>S Unlike colleges in some other countries, in the US, ECs and other factors have long been considered when students apply to colleges. That's because students' nonacademic activities on college campuses -- ranging from interactions with peers to doing ECs -- are considered an important part of the college experience here.</p>

<p>This also was true back in the old days, when considering other factors meant accepting to Ivies white males from the South who had lower grades and scores than the norm and "C" student New England prep students with dads with high government positions.</p>

<p>Remon said,</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>I agree with you wholeheartedly . Why should Northstarmom's son get a racial preference on admission as well as a legacy preference, if and when he applies to Harvard, so he can be admitted under lowered standards, because he is underperforming and underachieveing. If he weren't underperforming, and HE SHOULD NOT BE, simply because he is from the upper middle classs and a legacy of a black Harvard College graduate, Northstarmom, a 4th generation college graduate. Northstarmom's son does not deserve the race preference or AA, for admission to Harvard. You know what?, that is what the vast majority of underperforming and underachieving upper middle and upper class blacks get when they are admitted to Harvard with the RACIAL PREREFERENCE. This is absurb and grossly unfair and unjust. Yes, Northstarmom's case history is an argument against race based AA. What the middle and upper class Harvard blacks DISPLACED, after being admitted under AA with black race preferences and lowered standards, were the Asians and whites who were more stellar and higher performing from the lower economic classes. These upper class affluent blacks have had all the advantages of their economic class, i.e. excellent surburban schools, travel to France and the rest of the world, test prep, etc.. and they don't deserve a tip on admission with race preferences which is HUGE over a higher performing poorer Asian Am or white who is the "first in family to attend college". This is 2004, not the 1950s.</p>

<p>The beneficiaries of race based AA at Harvard are, by en large, the affluent blacks, who underperformed and underachieved, admitted under lowered standards. In fact, 2/3 of of Harvard's blacks are descendants of African and Carribbean immigrants, and not the decendants of Afro American slaves who suffered from the Jim Crow Laws, the intended beneficiaries of race based AA. Why do these Harvard blacks derserve racial preferential treatment on admission? That's ludricrous and perverse and a total corruption of AA and its original intent. The even LOWER PERFORMING and MORE UNDERACHIEVING blacks from the lowest economic classes, who are the actual descendants of Afro American slaves, receive no benefit at all from this demented policy, while the racial gaps between races in academic achievement have widen year after year. Race based AA solves absolutely nothing.</p>

<p>Again, the POOREST Asian Americans from families incomes of less than 20k/year with parents with a high school diploma or less outperform on the SAT I and achieve higher GPAs, and take more difficult courses than the richest blacks from family incomes of 100k/year and parents with college and graduate degrees. In fact, the poorest Asian Americans living in the poorest neighborhoods outperform whites in more affluent neighborhoods. That's the well known secret that the politically correct refuse to acknlowledge.</p>

<p>The question is , WHY ?? What are the root causes for this OVERALL UNDERPERFORMANCE AND UNDERACHIEVEMENT of all blacks, including the most affluent blacks. That's the crux of the problem, and until you find the reasons for this, the racial gaps in academic achievement will never be narrowed or closed.</p>

<p>Blacks get a racial preference based on the color of the skin, irrespective of their economic status. In fact, the vast majority of blacks admitted to Harvard are affluent blacks from the middle and upper middle classes who underperform and are admitted with lowered standards simply because they are Black, not because they were economically disadvantaged. Harvard's admitted blacks, by en large, ARE NOT ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED. Less than 10% of them even qualify for the Pell Grants, given to economically disadvantaged students of any race.</p>

<p>I am for giving preferential treatment to students based on economic disadvantage of ANY race, including the ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED Hmongs, ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGE whites, and ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED blacks, based on an economic disadvantage preference on admissions, but not based on a racial preference. That's the main point.</p>

<p>Economic disadvantage TRANSCENDS RACE. Using the racial preference for blacks at Harvard and the Iviies does not benefit economically disadvantaged blacks by en large. The black racial preference benefits the affluent underachieving blacks. They should not receive preference over a higher performing poorer Asian American or Hmong.</p>

<p>That's the absurdity of using race as a factor or perference. Abolish race preferences and use everything else these schools deem necessary for admissions. Use economic disadvantage or "first in family to attend college" as preferences for admissions, but don't use race or ethnic group. The aforemention TRANSCENDS RACE.</p>

<p>The adcoms lumps Asian Americans into one group with one classification as Asian Americans on the application. This is also done for Blacks, Latinos, etc.. That's the absurdity of using race and ethnic group classifications. In fact the Cambodians or Hmong are considered Asian Americans. They are not given racial preferences based on their Asian race for admissions, but they may be given preferences based on economic disadvantage and "first in family to attend college" which is quite different from getting a racial preference, which Asian Americans DO NOT GET BASED ON RACE. Asian Americans never asked for racial preferences, never received racial preferences, nor do they need racial preferences for admission. </p>

<p>No one, of any race, including blacks, should receive racial preferences or subjected to de facto quotas, based on "diversity" </p>

<p>Diversity TRANSCENDS race.</p>

<p>Admissions should be race and ethnic group neutral or blind. Period.</p>

<p>Nsm said, </p>

<p>[When it comes to colleges, too, some people keep trying to insist that colleges should only select students in terms of stats: grades, scores and class rank. That kind of system may work in countries like China and France, which have long selected college students that way. That system works for those countries because their colleges are not expected to provide students with the kind of nonacademic enrichment that US colleges are expected to do]</p>

<p>We all know this and we all do not live in China or France. Harvard does not admit students based on scores and stats alone. You are inferring that the Asian Ams are
admitted on their stelar stats alone. That is obviously false. Asian Ams, are admitted based on all the standards Harvard uses, including the holistic criteria of leadership, creativity, motivation, perseverance, special talents in the arts, music and sports including their highest stats such SAT scores, GPAS and class rank.</p>

<p>The point you missed is that Asian Am are required to meet a higher standard of achievement and a higher criteria than all other groups, including blacks, in order to be admitted. The bar is raised for Asian Ams, and the bar is higher than for blacks as well as whites in admissions. There is a DOUBLE STANDARD, a higher standard and holistic criteria Asians, than for any other group.</p>

<p>I say again, </p>

<p>[No one advocated admitting students on GPAs and test scores or numbers by being "numbers driven". That's the biggest mistake. Again, you are sterotyping Asian American applicants by inferring that Asian American applicants are only admitted on that basis, but that is the furtest from the truth with your anecdotes in your last post. Internal studies have proven otherwise, in that Asian Americans, not only have the highest test scores and GPAs and take the most advanced courses, but also meet or exceed the other holistic criteria for admissions which include creativity, motivition, high work ethic, leadership, special talents including sports (especially non-contact sports where Asians are well represented among the 41 varsity sports at Haravard), and the overcoming of obstacles such as poverty, culture and language differences and prejudice, stereotyping and even racism from the majority population.]</p>

<p>Is this topic really this complicated? Isn't the decision to admit a black student over a white or Asian student up to the college? Isn't the college making this decision because they feel that there's value in having a certain % of blacks students on campus, even if <em>some</em> of them were less qualified in GPA and SAT than the Asian student? Studies have already proven that, although the middle and upper class blacks don't always present with high SATs, they (the middle and upper class blacks) are just as likely to succeed on campus and graduate as their white and asian counterparts. Thus, the SAT score of a middle and upper class blacks isn't considered a very reliable factor when assessing their potential. I suppose this could lead us back to another discuss of the SAT...but since the colleges seems to have recognized the problem and figured out a solution for it, there's no need to harp on it.</p>

<p>In my opinion, it seems VERY greedy to want to shut out an entire race of people to make more spots for your own group....especially when your own group is already so heavily over-represented and the other group (the one you want to shut out) is far under-represented. Why would you want to do that? And why would you expect a college to go along with such a ridiculous plan?</p>

<p>"Unfortunately for you, hip hop culture, gangs, o.j.juries, and the like have made people more leary of the "Young black male"."</p>

<p>Well, colleges are just dying to admit more of these "Young black males", and I don't think they're doing it because they want to study gangs on campus. I can imagine that one thing colleges are trying do is graduate people who won't make statements like that of the above.....and that's a good thing.</p>

<p>Momsdream said, </p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Again, it is not "greedy". If you wanted proportional representation of the population, go the other 4000 colleges which don't use race preferences for admissions. Only about 150 schools use race preferences because certain groups are underreprepared and are admitted with lowered standards. There are community colleges, local state colleges as well as many small private colleges which present the best higher educational system in the world which don't use race preferences and have proportional representation of the population. 98% of the American population who received college degrees went to these other 4000 schools, If one is underprepared and underachieving, one to not go to an elite school, regardless of their race or group. The underprepared should not be in an elite college.</p>

<p>Again, Momsdream,</p>

<p>It has nothing to do with "greed" of one group. It has everything to do with FAIRNESS.</p>

<p>Again, I refer to my previous post.</p>

<p>[Now, let us consider the Jewish % at Harvard. Harvard is over 30% Jewish. Jews are 2.5% of the American population. I do not have a problem with this. Do you have a problem with this? Yet, you have a problem with Asian Ams being 17% of Harvard while being 4% of the American population. Jews are over 30% of Harvard, the most overrepresented ethnic and religious group at Harvard. They were admitted at no one's expense and without anti-Jewish quotas. I have no problem with the Jews' "gross overrpresentation". Jews are not classified as Jews by the adcoms.There is no box to check off on the applicant for Jews.</p>

<p>Now, Asian Ams are subjected to a de facto quota because of "diversity' and are unfairly and immorally limited and capped in their numbers, with whites, blacks, latinos admitted at their expense.</p>

<p>Asian Ams are 42% of UC Berkeley without racial quotas or AA. Asian Am are 20% of the U.of Texas-Austin and they are less than 3% of Texas' population when race based AA was abolished. They are even 25% of Stanford with its quota against Asian Ams.</p>

<p>If the de facto quota against Asian Ams were abolished and race based AA dropped at Harvard, Asian Ams would most certainly be more than 17%, or maybe at least over 30% or 40% at Harvard. If you don't have a problem with Jews being over 30% of Harvard, then you should not have a problem with Harvard being at 30% or more Asian Ams, because Jews are 2.5% while Asian Am are 4% of the population.</p>

<p>I don't have a problem with Harvard at 30% Jews, a most stellar group, yet you have a problem with Harvard being 17% Asian Ams, let alone more than 30% or even 40%, because they are also a most stellar group of applicants. Harvard is 30% Jewish, because Harvard doesn't a problem with this and it should not a problem if it were 30% or more Asian Ams if Harvard admitted Asian Ams as it does Jews, because both groups have the most STELLAR applicants.]</p>

<p>Momsdream said,</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Again I quote from my previous post to answer your post.</p>

<p>[Harvard's AFFLUENT admitted blacks are admitted under lowered standards, which include SAT I scores on average as much as several hundred points lower than the Harvard SAT I average of 1500 with GPAs and all other criteria lower. There are only 70 blacks in the country with SAT scores of 1500 and above. There are several thousand spaces in the elite colleges for this group of high scoring blacks alloted in this DE FACTO RACIAL QUOTA/racial "diversity" scenario. Therefore, of the miniscule number of the 70, maybe less than half will attend Harvard, meeting Harvard's SAT I standard. That gives 35 high scoring blacks left to the schools that require high scores such as MIT, CalTech, the 7 remaining Ivies, Stanford, Duke, and Rice, which have 8% to 10% racial diversity/de facto racial quotas for blacks resulting in an Black-White (Asian) Test Score Gap as much 200 to 300 points on the average in the Ivies, Stanford,MIT, etc.. There is a SAT I Score Gap as much 500 points for blacks between the SAT I average for the rest of the admitted class in schools such UC Berkeley before the the end of race-based AA. This resulted in a less than 40% graduation rate for blacks. This test score gap was 2 1/2 standard deviations from the mean SAT I scores of UC Berkeley, QUITE SIGNIFICANT. No matter how one demonizes the SAT I, this test score gap for blacks resulted in admitting underprepared and underachieving black students to Berkeley, the majority of them failed miserably or if they graduated, they graduated at the BOTTOM of the class, simply because of the double standards used in admissions. Now, one may say, don't use the the SAT I, but use the SAT II (achievement tests) for admissions. You will get the same results with the SAT II, if a double standard is used. Now, many schools will place more value on the SAT II scores, a measure of achievement. Remember, a student of any race needs a MINIMUM level of achievement to do college work. If they do not achieve that level, they should not be in college, let alone the elite colleges, the pinnacle being Harvard, MIT, CalTech (it claims no racial preferences are given with lowered standards for blacks), Stanford, Princeton and Yale. There are only a miniscule number of blacks who qualified in the SAT I (and the SAT IIs) in the nation, 70 in all in 2003 according to the College Board for these schools which allot thousands of spaces with these diversity/goals/diversty quotas for blacks. Harvard has the lowest Black-White Test Score Gap, with its 200 acceptances of blacks, simply because it almost depleted the miniscule pool of blacks of 70 who scored 1500+. Even at Harvard, the gap can be as much 200 points on average and as much as 500 points at with acceptances of 1000 or less on the SAT I. There are very few blacks left for the rest of the elite colleges such as YPSMC, and almost no high scoring blacks left for elite public universities such as UC Berkeley, UCLA, and the U.of Virginia, resulting in score gaps as much as 500 points between black SAT I scores and the scores of the rest of the class. This was the case at Berkeley and UCLA. This admissions process is a zero-sum game, meaning that a racial inclusionary quota for blacks, or a inclusionary for latinos, results in exclusionary quota for Asians or for for whites. It is zero-sum game. The outcome is all relative for the groups involved.]</p>

<p>Unfortunately for you, hip hop culture, gangs, o.j.juries, and the like have made people more leary of the "Young black male"."
.</p>

<p>It is also this mentality and type of "group think" that many schools are trying to avoid.Prejudice and racisms stems from ignorance because when people are less informed it is easy for them to make such off the wall generalizations.</p>

<p>To NSM, Sybbie, Momsdream et al.,</p>

<p>It is not only about SAT scores, but it is about the OVERALL academic underachievement and underattainment of All blacks. On the average, blacks, including the most affluent, achieve a lower level than all other groups (Asians, Latinos, Whites, and Jews). What are the causes for this problem and GAP. It is certainly not for lack of opportunity in admissions to all 4000 colleges and universities in America in the year 2004 with race based AA in place for over 40 years. These racial gaps in academic achievement have not narrowed, but in fact, widen. </p>

<p>Again, the POOREST Asian Americans from families incomes of less than 20k/year with parents with a high school diploma or less outperform on the SAT I and achieve higher GPAs, and take more difficult courses than the richest blacks from family incomes of 100k/year and parents with college and graduate degrees. In fact, the poorest Asian Americans living in the poorest neighborhoods outperform whites in more affluent neighborhoods. That's the well known secret that the politically correct refuse to acknlowledge.</p>

<p>The question is , WHY ?? What are the root causes for this OVERALL UNDERPERFORMANCE AND UNDERACHIEVEMENT of all blacks, including the most affluent blacks. </p>

<p>That's the crux of the problem, and until you find the reasons for this, the racial gaps in academic achievement will never be narrowed or closed.</p>

<p>Justifying race based AA on "diversity" is nothing but a cope-out excuse for not solving the problem and looking for solutions.</p>

<p>Exactly Sybbie! I think the OP just made a case for race playing a factor in the admissions decision. (shaking head)</p>

<p>Momsdream said,</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Ouite the opposite, no case was made for the use of race as a factor in admissions by the OP. There is much for the arguments against the use of race in admissions on this thread. Denying or ignoring these arguments against the use of race will only weaken the advocates for race based AA.</p>

<p>ethioman, there's that hostility surfacing again. What's the difference between racism, sexism and ageism? And how do you know remom's too old for an Ivy education? Comments like that contribute nothing to a conversation that can change attitudes. And if you believe that such attitudes cannot be changed, then why comment? To vent your anger? </p>

<p>A personal attack based on presumed age is no better than a personal attack based on presumed race, which I would remind you is all we have here, where no one sees anyone else.</p>