<p>What makes me think it’s culture? I look at the facts. Blacks/Hispanics do worse than Whites/Asians. Rich Blacks with educated parents do worse on average than poor Asians, so it’s not just economic class. So obviously there is another factor that results in one ethnic group doing worse regardless of economic class. What factor distinguishes African-Americans from Asians (just giving an example of 2 races) and could possibly explain the disparity in scores? Culture is 1 factor that comes to mind. </p>
<p>As a south-asian American who is the daughter of immigrants, I can tell you a LOT of focus on education is placed in our culture, especially for 1st/2nd generation immigrants. This is not as true in the Black community, at least not for African-Americans (African immigrants are different). Some of my Black friends at NYU, all of whom did well to get here, have told me that growing up, their peers would tease them for “acting white” because they were more into academics. I noticed this in my HS as well. Obviously culture doesn’t explain anything, but this is ONE factor. I’ve already explained why colleges use AA and why I understand and support it. I’ve cited 4 studies to back up my opinion and the opinions of colleges using AA. </p>
<p>You’re quick to criticize my opinion but I haven’t heard yours yet - what is one factor you can think of which distinguishes URMs from Whites/Asians and can explain why one group tests better regardless of economic class?</p>
<p>“Like I said, poor Asians will do better on average than rich black kids on tests like the SAT. Well, if poor Asians are doing better than rich blacks, it’s obviously not money that makes the difference, it’s race/culture. that’s why the AA should be socioeconomic argument makes no sense.”</p>
<p>Actually, that’s why AA based on race makes no sense, but AA based on socioeconomic factors makes sense. Why fill up a college with kids who aren’t as smart as others, despite having better means to do well. But I already went though this argument with you. Your position just makes no sense to me.</p>
<p>As for a boost given to women in Engineering, there are many benefits to having equal/close to equal gender percentages at a college. There’s little to no benefit (that I can see, though others probably think differently) to racial diversity at a college.</p>
<p>sgl: Do any of those studies mention what it is about the culture that separates the races?</p>
<p>You’re talking about your experience and your friend’s experience, and then generalizing. One of my friends has an adopted black cousin. I’ve met him, he’s into death metal and does well in school, both against black stereotypes. Not everyone of a certain race has the same experiences. Culture is dependent on where you grow up and who you grow up with, not your race.</p>
<p>What do you think about geographic affirmative action? If schools tried to include an equal mix of kids from rural, suburban, and urban areas, they’d have a good amount of real diversity, no?</p>
<p>so you’re suggesting that only the top tier should receive higher education?</p>
<p>eta: doing well on SATs =/= smart. why should someone who doesn’t test well or whose culture doesn’t revolve around testing be denied the chance to explore and grow intellectually? </p>
<p>the biggest problem with public education is its absurd reliance on standardization.</p>
<p>Well, how about instead of smart, education focused. And instead of college, top-colleges. And then yes. If you don’t care about learning anything, why should you go to college.</p>
<p>a low score on the SAT does not mean that someone isn’t “education focused” or that they don’t “care about learning anything.” if they didn’t care about learning, why would they apply to college?</p>
<p>QwertyKey - I understand your argument but here’s why I disagree:
SAT score is not a measure of intelligence in any way. It’s not like Black students start failing college once they get here, even if they have lower SAT score on average. They do just fine like the rest of us.
You state having gender diversity in Engineering is more important than racial diversity in college. Ok, maybe it is to you, but most American Universities have different goals than you. They want more URMs, they don’t want a college full of 10,000 Chinese kids, just like Engineering programs don’t want to be dominated by Asian/White Males. </p>
<p>Logic - I think you agreed with me without even realizing it! You talked about a Black friend raised in a non-Black household and said he goes against the stereotype. Then you said background/culture has more to do with it than race. This is true, but obviously race has a lot to do with culture. A Black person raised by Chinese people would probably share a lot of aspects of Asian culture as opposed to African-American culture. But most people are raised by their biological parents of the same race and not adopted. You’re giving me outliers while I’m giving you averages. </p>
<p>I don’t define diversity by race. I’d rather go to a college with little racial diversity as long as it has diversity of personalities, majors, politics, religion, socioeconomic class, georgraphy, and life experiences. But we’re talking about what Universities value here, not me. Colleges use AA because racial diversity matters to them, for a multitude of reasons, both altruistic and selfish. And they do care about geographic diversity, but they seem to care about racial diversity more. Some boast of having students from all 50 states and many countries. </p>
<p>Gstein, not sure if you were being sarcastic, but whatever…I was anti-AA for a long time, as many whites/asians from upper-middle class America are.</p>
<p>I don’t think we agree. You said “You’re giving me outliers while I’m giving you averages” but we’re both giving examples of people we know. Most people are raised by biological parents, but you still haven’t proven that all parents fit the racial stereotypes that your friends’ parents are.</p>
<p>There are a few more reasons why race is not a good way to do affirmative action, including the difference between White Hispanics and Non-White Hispanics, and African-Americans and Africans. I’ll go into more detail on those later.</p>
<p>Logic, you’ve missed my point - obviously not all parents fit racial stereotypes. There are Black parents who urge their intelligent children to pursue academics. There are Asians who don’t care about academics. But we are speaking of generalizations within a culture. AA based on race assumes that race defines culture. You’re acting as though colleges care about the common good and AA is being used to benefit the disadvantaged. Well, let’s be real - colleges care about making themselves look good, to attract more applicants/students to raise revenue. “Racial diversity” is often defined as a positive quality, thus colleges manipulate the application process to boost racial diversity for their own benefit. </p>
<p>I provided you 4 studies to show that URMs score lower on average regardless of their income and parents education, and I’m sure you could find many more online. There must be a reason to explain this discrepancy, I used culture as a possible explanation. What is your explanation? Why do you think the poor asians outscore the rich blacks?</p>
<p>I agree with stargazerlilies. What else could it be? Unless skin pigmentation is directly proportional to intelligence, there is no other explanation. While people may not want to admit it, there is truth to stereotypes, and there is a predominant culture among races. I don’t understand the stubbornness of some posters.</p>
<p>to back up stargazer for a minute, “culture” refers not only to the student’s culture, but to the culture at large, where children of color are often tracked into low-performing classes from the very beginning on the assumption that they aren’t going to perform well anyway. there is a very, very pervasive cultural assumption–you can see it all over this thread, honestly–that black and hispanic students are lazy, uncaring, not interested, so they’re tracked into non-stimulating, uninteresting classes. they are essentially told from the beginning that they’re not going to make it, and they’re not given the same opportunities as everyone else, despite claims to the contrary.</p>
<p>couple this with the idea that doing well in school is “acting white,” and, well, you know.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with white folks getting together to deal with racism as long as it is an open and honest discussion. Some of these folks have lived in extremely sheltered environments and have never been exposed to any kind of diversity. Also, racism in this country originated with Euro-American expansion and was fueled by Native American genocide, racial slavery etc so its about time, perhaps, that white folks get together to deal with the ramifications of these historical realities, many of their ancestors created them. That is not an indictment but it’s true. We can’t go back and change things, but we can move forward in addressing the legacy of what came before us.</p>
<p>The title of this thread is totally off, then. Why call it “white-only,” when it’s more like “white-focused”? Everyone is welcome, but the discussion will probably revolve around how white people perceive and deal with race, cultural differences, etc?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure what your statement is meant to prove, LogicWarrior. If person A is white and more qualified for a certain position than person B (who is a minority), but fails to gain admittance to that position because of being white, isn’t that a sign that sometimes being white can work against you?</p>
<p>well admissions aren’t just stats-based, most qualified applicants are white upper-middle class, so they admit people with hooks like being black or having good ecs or having a difficult childhood.</p>
<p>black people stand out from the crowd, is what i’m saying. should we reject people with good ecs because they’re less qualified?</p>
<p>Of course admissions are not just about grades and SAT’s, I agree with you on that. My point is that if schools (or employees, or whatever) reject white people who are more qualified overall (grades, SAT’s, EC’s, etc) in order to admit people who have a minority “hook,” you can’t exactly argue that whites always benefit from their majority status. That’s all. “White privilege” is not always in effect, and I know, from personal experience, that being under-represented can sometimes be much more helpful.</p>
<p>It must, isn’t that the point? However, I never argued against affirmative action, nor did I argue for it. What I am trying to point out is that each race-gender combination has its own hurdles to overcome, and assuming that white men, and to a lesser extent women, will always have it easier, or won’t have to work extra hard (I believe someone on here stated that minority students have to work 3-4 times harder) is a little ridiculous. In fact, where affirmative action is concerned, it seems like white students need to be absolutely exceptional to stand out, because they don’t have the “minority” label/hook.</p>