<p>If the true reason is that high-SES kids are born on third base, then ORM/URM should be correlated and measured by SES. But if the reason is that being from a certain race is a burden, then it’s disingenuous to hide it under a more reasonable sounding SES argument, while at the same time suppressing the opportunities poor Asian kid with parents who can’t speak English while giving a break for the AA doctor’s child.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I like the quote. I support holistic admission.</p>
<p>@poetgrl
</p>
<p>Unless of course, you are not in that university’s boat because you were displaced by a less academically qualified applicant</p>
<p>lookingforward said:</p>
<p>“No, high SES families are not ‘smarter,’ not in the sense of inherent abilities. Imo, they are simply wise to the mechanics and depth and breath of the details they function with, the range of opportunities.”</p>
<p>There is ample research that shows that high SES families are considerably more intelligent on average than low SES families. Among people that study IQ, there is really no disagreement about this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d say there is some disagreement.</p>
<p>[An</a> Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie](<a href=“http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J134v08n03_05#preview]An”>http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J134v08n03_05#preview)</p>
<p>[ResearchBrief:Socioeconomic</a> Status and IQ](<a href=“http://www.ascd.org/publications/researchbrief/v2n21/toc.aspx]ResearchBrief:Socioeconomic”>http://www.ascd.org/publications/researchbrief/v2n21/toc.aspx)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Going back to the OP, this is probably because Affirmative Action does not exist to help racial minorities. It exists to “help” everyone on the campus experience diversity. This is the US Supreme Ct’s position, anyway.</p>
<p>Concluding that racial minorities are somehow “hurt” by their placement in elite colleges is patronizing and insulting; it insinuates that those students are incapable of making their own decisions about what will work best for them, and judges their decisions (such as whether to pursue STEM majors or not) as out of their control. This is probably why “universities won’t admit it.” The reason they won’t admit it is probably because they don’t subscribe to that mindset.</p>
<p>" There is ample research that shows that high SES families are considerably more intelligent on average than low SES families. Among people that study IQ, there is really no disagreement about this"</p>
<p>Since you seem to know the literature, I wonder if you point me to some of the peer reviewed literature that looks at whether this is equally true across the range, or if this is more true at the extremes.</p>
<p>sewhappy said:</p>
<p>“Well, my kid’s black roommate at an Ivy was absolutely brilliant and works at Goldman now and certainly never seemed to be mismatched at college. My younger one’s black roommate is the dynamo of the four girls. She hardly seems to be floundering. Not buying it. At least for highly selective schools, the kids who get in – whatever race – have what it takes.”</p>
<p>We all have anecdotes that contradict the statistics. I can tell you about the Jeep owner that claims his car is the most reliable despite ample evidence to the contrary.</p>
<p>And a reasonable person will always review the statistical study to see if it was performed correctly (many are not). But if is performed correctly, it is time to abandon the anecdote.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t it be cool if there were enough black parents on cc to give “significant” input? Or black students for that matter.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>GMT-- First of all, nobody is “displaced” because nobody has a “place” at any of these institutions. So, that thinking is a part of the problem.</p>
<p>The ship I was refering to was the ship of education, in general. If you believe the only worthwhile ship is the one you don’t have a berth on? That’s really not anyone else’s problem. The fact is, the more better students go to a wider array of universities, the better the colleges they attend tend to become, over time.</p>
<p>Sometimes I think people don’t recognize how many students now go to college. The number of college graduates is now approaching the percentage of high school graduates from the wwII era. Graduate school is what undergrad once was.</p>
<p>All that said, anyone who thinks they “had a spot” at a university based on their own criteria is making a mistake. The universities and colleges have other criteria. They simply do not value your metrics the way you do. They value their own metrics.</p>
<p>For good reason.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Especially since the original book review specifically mentions Ivy League schools where NO ONE has “a spot”. When your pool of applicants includes thousands who are capable of doing the work, you get the luxury of picking and choosing the kinds of students you want. </p>
<p>Such schools can and often do place a high value on students from low income families or minorities who, despite challenges, made it into the ballpark of the thousands of perfectly capable applicants with the grades and scores to do the work.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Tell that to Abigail Fisher & Rachel Michalewicz, the plaintiffs in Fisher v. UT</p>
<p>There is actually a difference between a public and a private university.</p>
<p>If you are instate and you feel a public university has not followed the law, you have recourse. Private institutions can decide, if they want, as a social experiment to let in 10% 2.0 students, just to see what they can do. (they don’t do this, of course, but the point is it’s their ballpark, not yours.) Publics have a different mission and are subject to different regulations. </p>
<p>We will see if she wins. Her case isn’t all that compelling when you read it.</p>
<p>Yes, it will be very interesting to see what the Supreme Court has to say about this. </p>
<p>I think Roberts said it best earlier: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race”.</p>
<p>"Private institutions can decide, if they want, as a social experiment to let in 10% 2.0 students, just to see what they can do. (they don’t do this, of course, but the point is it’s their ballpark, not yours.) "</p>
<p>Given that private institutions get paid with federally subsidized student loans, I wonder how long that assertion will continue to work.</p>
<p>^Wouldn’t that be nice. (#114)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>this is a good point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have always felt that any program that is designed to artificially boost one group over another (as opposed to a strict meritocracy) was actually harmful and not beneficial at all in the long run for the group that it is intended to help.</p>
<p>Believing that somehow, for whatever reason, one group of people needed special help always seemed to me to reek of paternalism, horribly condescending, was extremely insulting and smacks of noblesse oblige.</p>
<p>My ancestors were discriminated against for a thousand years. Perseverance, hard work, determination and other similar attributes are the best way to succeed. Not by accepting a handout and a free pass.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Who were your ancestors?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At first, no. Now, yes.
Funny how many people have such short memories.</p>
<p>A/A was originally justified as a compensation to make up for past discriminations.</p>
<p>It was only after that idea had trouble flying anymore, that it was switched to being a rallying cry for “diversity.”</p>
<p>[Affirmative</a> action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action]Affirmative”>Affirmative action - Wikipedia)</p>