Princeton Study: Ending AA would only help Asians not Whites

Parents Forum
101

<p>Patuxent, only racists would diminish the value of an Ivy degree on that basis, and racists will look for any excuse. I say that because no matter how the person got in -- legacy, development, or AA -- once in, they all must take the same courses to pass. The curriculum is the same, at least within majors; the coursework is the same; the teaching is the same.</p>

<p>And that is obvious to anyone who thinks about it. </p>

<p>So the "bias" (i.e. your posited asterisk) is straight out racism: the person's credentials are mistrusted not because of the quality of education, but because of what the person was pre-education. Since there is no way to change the color of one's skin, that bias is going to be there in any case.</p>

<p>On top of that, everyone who has half a brain knows that even when AA is used, not everyone within the AA category needs it to gain admission -- it helps a certain parcentage of marginal candidates, but certainly not across the board. So to assume that a black physician got her MD only via AA is in itself an assumption based on race prejudice; you wouldn't assume that any strong and athletic appearing professional you meet was a recruited athlete with lower than average test scores. </p>

<p>Fortunately, despite your bogus argument, even right-wing Republicans don't buy it -- or else Condaleeza Rice wouldn't have ended up as Secretary of State. There still is a lot of prejudice in the world, but the idea that it comes from AA is just a circular argument: if there wasn't AA, and individuals went to state colleges or historically black colleges instead, then of course the same people who devalue the Harvard degree held by a black person would devalue the institution. -- which of course was always done in the past. </p>

<p>In the 20 years I practiced law, I never saw any hispanic or african american lawyer judged or scrutinized by anyone else by any standard other than how well he or she functioned in a courtroom (or deposition, or with written pleadings). I met brilliant lawyers of all races and idiots of all races, and of course many in between -- and the proof was in the quality of their work. Law firms, government agencies, and law schools were just as anxious as anyone else to achieve racial balance in their hiring practices - so it certainly wasn't a strike against anyone.</p>

102

<p>"As long as Harvard has AA every URM from a group that recieves preferential admittance will be looked on as second rate and that is what the real problem with AA is. The degree will always have a little star after it - BA<em>, PhD</em>, etc. It is the graduates equivelent of Tufts' Syndrome. So you hit 70 homers on steroids - who cares. You're still not Babe Ruth or Mickey Mantle or even Reggie Jackson. You don't quite measure up. You had a world class time in the 100 but you only ran 90 of those yards."</p>

<p>LOL...Okay.</p>

<p>Anyway, people who think that (above) are the same people who would think less of the AA receiving group anyway. So, the AA receiving group probably doesn't care what this crowd thinks - they're used to the excuses for racism. Remember, these groups are used to being through of as second rate by certain types. The only difference here is that they'll not care what you think while holding a selective school's degree in hand. Do away with AA and there will be some other compelling reason to hate.....</p>

<p>There are so very few blacks going to top colleges anyway. To spend this much time trying to add extra hurdles for the few that do is ridiculous. But, for those who want to spin their wheels this way.....please....continue. It's like a shiny toy - keeping you busy.</p>

<p>Calmom, I enjoyed your post. I admit skipping most of this thread. So, I'm sorry if I missed other good points along the way.</p>

103

<p>"not everyone within the AA category needs it to gain admission "</p>

<p>And that calmon is specifically the problem with AA. It taints the accomplishments of the trulu accomplished. And if you think I am the racist then revisit the Clarence Thomas hearings - the ingrate Uncle Tom got brought up to the Big House and now won't tap dance to the liberal tune. The liberal press did not intimate that he was an unqualified AA appointment they flat out said it and said he would never have gotten into college but for AA.</p>

<p>AA doesn't hurt white people, it hurts minorities.</p>

104

<p>BTW is it nice to be able to describe anyone you have an honest disagreement with as a bigot? </p>

<p>Chicker George got his foot cut off 200 years ago so someone is "entitled" to a "shiny toy" today? I don't think so. Call me any name your little heart desires. Men should be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin. Get in the race and run a full hundred yards like everybody else. If you want to be treated the same then play by the same rules. If you don't care if you are treated the same then you will be treated like what you are.</p>

105

<p>But where is this AA you keep babbling about? I mean the AA for the rich, (mostly white) folks at the private institutions is easily demonstrated, but I don't think you meant them. In fact, I didn't think you were referring to the private "prestige" institutions at all.</p>

<p>So where? Name a state? a place? Where? Not in California - against the law. Not in Washington - against the law. Where, exactly?</p>

106

<p>Unless I misread or misunderstood a gazzillion editorials, columnists, news stories, TV and radio insta pundits then Grutter v. Bollinger gave the US Supreme Courts imprimatur to Affirmative Action in college admissions. Perhaps you were out of the country at the time or in the custody of space aliens.</p>

<p>For the record while I think AA is a bad idea I fully support a private institutions right to practice it. In the case of state supported schools it is usually, at least for undergraduate admissions a moot point. All but the state flagship universities are for all practical purposes open admission. California because it has a population eight or ten times the size of a "normal" state may be in a slightly different category. Instead of one or two selective schools and then a bunch of basically open admission regional school colleges it has a whole separate UC system designed to take the top 8% or so of high school graduates and also to be major research universities.</p>

<p>Anyway while it may be against state law to discriminate on the basis of color in college admissions in California racial discrimination in admissions is permitted under federal law.</p>

107

<p>"Fortunately, despite your bogus argument, even right-wing Republicans don't buy it -- or else Condaleeza Rice wouldn't have ended up as Secretary of State."
What kind of proof is that? Rice may or not have benefited from AA. You CAN benefit from a policy that you oppose, and Rice does not necessarily share the same views of her party.</p>

<p>I read an article by Stephen L. Carter, a black law professor at Yale, about why he opposed AA, specifically on the grounds that he did not want to be considered the "best black," that he didnt want to be considered best in the context of his race. AA devalues the accomplishments of URMs, and promotes double standards. Carter wants blacks to show that they are the best, not the best blacks.</p>

108

<p>"Anyway while it may be against state law to discriminate on the basis of color in college admissions in California racial discrimination in admissions is permitted under federal law."</p>

<p>Well, how bogus can you get. If there was a college in California that practiced Affirmative Action, every conservative law firm and think tank in the country would be all over them like white on rice. </p>

<p>So, again, tell me - where is this Affirmative Action that you object to so much actually being practiced? Where? Name one state. One public institution. Come on - if this bothers you so much, you must know, right? Don't tell me about Yale that has AA for the white guys. Where are those nice rich white folks from the good neighborhoods being denied places in public schools?</p>

109

<p>OK I will play your game mini - here is one</p>

<p>University of Michigan. </p>

<p>However it is not "the nice rich white folks from the good neighboehoods" who bear the brunt of the burden to ease somebody else's conscience. It is somebody with slanty eyes and yellow skin or the kid of working class parents, a cop and a secretary like Jennifer Gratz the plaintiff in Gratz v Bollinger. Is the daughter of a cop and a secretary a rich kid? She was the first in her family to go to college. Is that because of 10 generations of privilege?</p>

110

<p>Name one state. One public institution.</p>

<p>Michigan. PR website: "Minority status Important "
Wisconsin Madison "Minority status Considered "
UIUC Minority status Considered<br>
U of Colorado Boulder Minority status Important<br>
UVA Minority status Considered<br>
UNC chapel hill Minority status Important<br>
UMass amherst Minority status Considered<br>
U delaware Minority status Considered<br>
U of Rhode Island Minority status Considered<br>
U pittsburgh Minority status Considered</p>

111

<p>"Chicker George got his foot cut off 200 years ago so someone is "entitled" to a "shiny toy" today? I don't think so."</p>

<p>What? Chicken George? </p>

<p>My reference to the shiny toy was that I find it amusing that YOU claim to be so darned concerned about African Americans and what's best for them. It's a sham.....a fraud. And if you think this is about someone named Chicken George, you're really missing the point entirely.</p>

<p>Anyway, if this is what keeps you busy and gives you a place to focus your energy, go for it. It's better than cross-burning or church bombings, I suppose. That's why I call it a shiny toy - it has your attention and distracts you - as shiny toys do for young children. </p>

<p>I would be more inclined to believe any of this if you didn't represent it under the guise of doing what's best for African Americans. Admit that you couldn't care less about African Americans - you're in this for the benefit of Asians - period......everyone else be damned.</p>

112

<p>Name one state. One public institution.</p>

<p>Michigan. PR website: "Minority status Important "
Wisconsin Madison "Minority status Considered "
UIUC Minority status Considered
U of Colorado Boulder Minority status Important
UVA Minority status Considered
UNC chapel hill Minority status Important
UMass amherst Minority status Considered
U delaware Minority status Considered
U of Rhode Island Minority status Considered
U pittsburgh Minority status Considered</p>

<p>GREAT. Now let me know how AA worked. How many "less qualified" folks got in at the expense of the nice rich white folk. I mean at many of those folks they could have just as easily have said "equestrian team considered" or "large donations important". I still have no information from you about whether this has had an impact on actual admissions whatsoever. </p>

<p>"However it is not "the nice rich white folks from the good neighboehoods" who bear the brunt of the burden to ease somebody else's conscience. It is somebody with slanty eyes and yellow skin or the kid of working class parents,..."</p>

<p>Evidence, please? (To my way of thinking, what the schools did - if they did anything - was increase actual academic quality for all students).</p>

<p>" Is that because of 10 generations of privilege?"</p>

<p>You missed the point - it is these folks who are the beneficiaries of AA - THESE are the folks who have taken places from folks like Jennifer Gratz, and have done so for more than a hundred years.</p>

113

<p>
[quote]
These "characteristics" you mention being race, correct?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They include race, that's correct, but where I work they also may favor candidates who are poor, first generation in college, from a single parent family, or from an underrepresented county (in state) or region (out of state).</p>

<p>The institution also values underrepresented genders in certain fields, such as men in nursing and women in engineering. That can also be a plus-factor.</p>

<p>So race, sure, but not race alone. That's the one that generates the most discussion, of course.</p>

<p>You're consistent in not liking that anyone is ever favored for any reason that doesn't directly address their quality, so my hat is off to you for constancy. </p>

<p>However, as someone who has worked in admissions I have come to believe that there are so many cases where a student is more than test scores and GPA! There are cases where a kid with 1200 SAT is a better admit than the one with 1300. In a pure score-driven system that would be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's why few colleges work with a score-driven system. </p>

<p>Based on personal experience, I prefer that a college think more broadly about candidates (AND about the effects of their admission on the overall experience at the school) but I realize some people feel differently.</p>

114

<p>
[quote]
University of Michigan.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I understand how galling it is to think poor kids were shafted, but please recall that under the old point system, Michigan gave the exact same number of points to a student of low-SES as they did to an underrepresented minority. </p>

<p>Now they ask about this sort of thing more widely--single parent home, first in college, low SES, etc--so they know about more candidates and their personal circumstances. But no points system exists, now, it's just a plus factor.</p>

115

<p>It is understandable that the increased competition for "earning" one of the coveted spots at one of the "elite" schools does create a lot of negative emotions. It is, however, a shame to try to establish that some students do NOT belong or belong less than others who did not get accepted. </p>

<p>Behind the percentages, one has to look at some absolute numbers. The numbers for 2008 (available at <a href="http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/prospective/applying/stats/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/prospective/applying/stats/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br>
) indicate that about 1,000 caucasians enrolled at Harvard as well as 326 Asians. In comparison, 51 Mexican American and 18 Native Americans did share the honor, and one should ask himself WHICH one of them was not worthy of admission. Is it THAT offensive that 51 Mexican American might have taken the place of one of FOUR THOUSANDS Asians who might have been rejected? </p>

<p>What are the chances that one of the 51 Mexican Anericans could be another Sergio Troncoso? Take a look at his bio available at <a href="http://thinkers.net/writer/troncoso.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://thinkers.net/writer/troncoso.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Here's an excerpt:</p>

<p>
[quote]
"I grew up in Ysleta, a historic community on the east side of El Paso. In 1682, Spanish priests and Tigua Indians built the Ysleta Mission. When I was a child in Ysleta, it was a rural community. We had cotton fields next to our house and an irrigation canal behind our back fence. Our neighborhood didn't have electricity or running water. My parents, recent immigrants from Mexico like everyone else in Ysleta, were from Chihuahua. They built their own home. My mother nailed down the roof shingles, and my father dug the hole for the outhouse in our backyard. When I was in grade school, Ysleta became part of El Paso, and the city extended the water and sewer lines to our neighborhood. We dug the deep trenches to connect us to the main pipes in our street. My brothers and I had no choice but to dig these huge trenches after school, and we complained bitterly to my father. </p>

<p>Pearl Crouch, my journalism advisor, a tough woman who reminded me of my abuelita, was the first person who opened my eyes to the world outside El Paso. When I had never even been to the fancy neighborhoods in El Paso, she took me to writing competitions in San Francisco and New York City.</p>

<p>"I was accepted to Harvard College, and I decided to enroll without knowing exactly where it was. That's how smart I was. I thought Harvard was near Chicago. I mean, I knew it was a good school, and I knew JFK had gone there. But I had never bothered to find it on a map, and I didn't know what I was getting myself into. Harvard was a brutal experience for me. The students were so much more sophisticated than anyone I could even pretend to be. I missed the simplicity of my life back in Ysleta. I missed my family. The academic work burned my brain and drove me to exhaustion and consumed me like nothing else before it. I focused on Mexico and Latin America simply because I wanted to learn more about where I was from, my culture, my history, this self under siege. John Womack, the great Mexican historian, became my mentor in many ways, because he was honest and direct, and because he didn't care about any pretension but only about producing good work. This Oklahoman in cowboy boots also reminded me of home. I graduated magna cum laude and won a Fulbright Scholarship to go to Mexico City for one year. So I ended one adventure and began a new one."</p>

<p>"In Mexico City, I worked at UNAM and El Colegio de M</p>

116

<p>Xiggi, the elite colleges can set any admission creteria they want. They do not and have never admitted or qualified students by "raw numbers". Historically they have always placed great importance on parentage and financial status -- and up until the last 30 years or so, they also set boundaries based on gender. The only thing that has changed is their view on what kind of parentage is needed to get into the Ivies.</p>

<p>The SATs are a race and wealth biased test. There is no way around that. You can run the numbers again and again, and the it will always come out with a direct statistical correlation between income level and score level, and between race and score level (more so for income than race, but blacks and hispanics still show up on the bottom of the spectrum). The test has NEVER been validated to show anything except a very slight correlation between test scores and first year grades at college. The correlation disappears in the second year, and the correlation has been shown to be less predictive for ethnic groups with the lower scores. In other words in order to get into an elite college one has to score very high on a test that that is known to discriminate against black people and have no particular correspondence to how well they do in college. </p>

<p>So the very first thing to do in order to establish a race-neutral admissions policy would be to throw out the standardized tests, simply because they have been shown to be descriminatory in effect. Simple equal protection really mandates that result -- the state of California did the studies and found that grades and class standing was far more significant, no matter what the "quality" of the school. </p>

<p>Instead, the elites choose to use a subjective admission policy, discounting the value of the test (and other factors) that they know discriminate against groups of people that they want to admit. They use a subjective admission policy anyway -- you can have an SAT of 1600 and be your class valedictorian and still get rejected, because the most compelling entrance criteria is simply whether they like you after reading your application package.</p>

<p>The irony is that people will accept that Harvard can premise an admissions decision on factors like who the candidate's' daddy is (bonus for legacies and children of politicians and celebrities), how well they play on the football field, whether they have developed talents or abilities in endeavors generally open only to rich people who can afford to pay for the privilege of participating. They can consider weighted grades, even though AP and Honors classes tend to be widely available only at more affluent schools. They can use an ED process to fill up to half its class, in a process that obviously discriminates in favor of the eite. They can have relationships with "feeder schools" which inevitably are schools for the elite and privileged. Anything that favors the elite is considered o.k. and acceptable, and people will find a ready argument as to why that benefits the school and must continue. </p>

<p>But the minute a factor that favors blacks and hispanics is brought into the equation, the cry is that the person is taking away someone else's "spot" at the school.</p>

117

<p>momsdream - if I gave you the impression that I cared more about African Americans than other Americans I apologize. I don't. But if you think I care LESS about them than other Americans you are mistaken. A permanent racial or ethnic or religious underclass with a chip on its shoulder is bad for America, bad for my neighborhood, bad for business, and bad for me.</p>

118

<p>I agree with some of what you say, but in making your argument, you make certain points that do not quite square with fact. For example:
-Harvard is EA, not ED, so students are not locked in and can wait to compare financial aid packages before committing.
-It is well known that Harvard and other schools like it evaluate students within the CONTEXT of what is available at their schools. So, a student coming from a disadvantaged or rural area that doesn't offer AP's would not be compared with a prep school student where many such courses are available.</p>

119

<p>oops, I forgot to say who my post was directed to: Calmom</p>

120

<p>"I still have no information from you about whether this has had an impact on actual admissions whatsoever."</p>

<p>mini is of course asking for information that no school will release. There used to be a saloon in my old home town. When the neighborhood started to change and the state liquor control board started to get prickly and actually enforce some of the laws on the books the saloon decided to become a private club. As near as anyone could tell the only requirement for joining was that you be white and have a quarter but that wasn't written down anywhere and of course the management would never admit it.</p>

<p>One day the uncle of a friend of mine decided to stop and have a beer. He hadn't been there before. He was an Italian bricklayer. He was Sicilian and dark to begin with. He worked a lot with his shirt off and it was summer. He had short curly hair. Guess you know where this is going. They wanted him to drop trow before they would let him join.</p>