<p>Many people say that “race shouldn’t matter in college admissions”. I agree with them 110%. but unfortunately, because race matters in society, it is necessary that it also matter in college admissions. In a perfect world all admissions could be race-blind and we would still have the best potential society. But due to our circumstances here in America, programs that aid Under Represented Minorities (URMs) are a necessity. </p>
<li><p>Because these minorities and ethnic groups ARE a part of our society, it’s important that everyone be college educated. Sending a student from and african american or hispanic background to a good college increases exponentially the chance that they will stay away from crime (safer society) and that their children will also go to college.</p></li>
<li><p>Underprivileged students that have risen to the point of being competitive with their privileged counterparts demonstrate an undeniable drive because it is obviously more difficult for that student to reach the same place.</p></li>
<li><p>Frankly, if your a privileged white student from an affluent suburb who has honestly taken complete advantage of all of the luxuries and opportunities afforded to you, you shouldn’t have to worry at all about affirmative action because it wouldn’t affect you. </p></li>
</ol>
<ul>
<li>Now i’m not saying that an obviously under qualified URM student should be admitted to Harvard over a competitive white or asian student. But if the two are roughly equal, the URM should receive additional consideration. Because there is still racism in society, and the most impacting of this racism comes from whites being the majority and currently economically and politically dominant ethnic group, the playing field for URM is not at all level. Something needs to be done to maintain a diverse and heterogeneous America. </li>
</ul>
<p>-I’m ready to catch a lot of flak for this, but i’m interested in hearing the general viewpoint here. Just no name calling, and no calling anybody else’s ideas “stupid”.</p>
<p>When race makes a decision from 'accepted' to 'rejected', I think AA has failed.</p>
<p>There are lots of people on forums here, some URMs that had they been white or Asian, probably would have been rejected. If the swing of the decision changes completely (if race only makes a difference from waitlisting a student, then that's not a problem), AA has failed..</p>
<p>The major flaw is that not ALL blacks or Hispanics poor and not ALL whites and Asians are rich. The foundation of AA is that just because you're of a certain race you receive an advantage in admissions.
What you're advocating has nothing to do with race, rather it has to do with the advantages available to someone. I'd shoot someone if they seriously think that a poor Asian or white has more opportunities available to them than a rich black or Hispanic person.</p>
<p>I really don't like AA at all! I think colleges, who claim to want to take "the best of the best" both academically/athletically/blah blah should NOT take race into account. A student should get into a college because of their achievments, not because of their race (no pun intended). I know many URMs who are EXTREMELY qualified to go to top schools. I also know tons of people who are not URMs who are EXTREMELY qualified to go to schools. They're achievments should be compared, not their race. One race should not have "lower grades" than another and still be able to get accepted nor should one have to have "higher grades."</p>
<p>AA contradicts itself. They want to create diversity and squash discrimination (which is a good thing) but lowering and raising the bar, even slightly, for different races does the complete opposite. </p>
<p>AND FOR THAT MATTER, sex as well accept at single sex i guess lol).</p>
<p>Boys and Girls, as well as URMs and Represent Minorities are able to do equally well. I do not think its fair that if two people had, say, THE SAME EXACT stats, a college would most prob take the URM or the preferred sex (girl or boy depending on the college, location, etc.).</p>
<p>In conclusion...So, let the achievements do the talking. I think race and sex for that matter should be left out all togeather.</p>
<p>I hate how opponents of affirmative action always use that stupid comparison between a poor white and a rich black. That's the wrong comparison, you need to compare poor whites with poor blacks and rich whites with rich blacks. Those are the comparisons colleges make.</p>
<p>I think colleges just want equal representation of all the races in society. Just as they pick and choose among different majors and specialties, they also are trying to build a class based on race. They wouldn't want a whole class full of biology majors; they don't want a whole class full of one race.
That's my perspective on affirmative action.</p>
<p>When my dad applied for college in 1982, he was in the top 4%. He was poor, and white. He received a $500 scholarship, no grants. He was forced to join the Marine Corps because colleges favored women and minorities at the time. Never mind that he had better grades, never mind that his father was unemployed at the time.</p>
<p>Silverkinz, you sure seem to know a lot about why your father didn't get the grant he wanted even though a) you weren't alive b) you weren't on the committee that dealt out the grants.</p>
<p>Its always so easy to blame the black kids huh......</p>
<p>@Just_Browsing. I believe the main emphasis is on race, not income. Notice how they ask you your race on the application and NOT your income. Unless you choose to write your essay on how you had to work 40 hours a week to supplement your family's income, the adcoms don't know. When stats come out, there's no single breakdown by race AND income. Those are always presented separately. </p>
<p>Sure, some colleges choose based and major and specialty but those are partially for practical reasons. They can hardly have a small Biology department running around trying to cater to 90% of the undergraduate population while the Economics faculty sits around twiddling their thumbs. </p>
<p>Why should race play a role, positive and negative? College admissions should be based on merit, unless the adcoms want to admit that certain races are born with less mental capability than others. Somehow I doubt that that would be well recieved. In the end, to be totally unracist, skin color/race doesn't matter. Why then, is having a balanced mix of races so important if all people are equal?</p>
<p>"Blame the black kids"? Please, don't make me out to be a racist. I was referring to ALL minorities... African-American, Hispanic, Asian, etc. etc. And I just had this conversation with my dad a few hours ago. Kentucky's system is very different from California's. I'm just telling you what he told me. He didn't qualify for the grants because the grants went to the women and minorities. Nowadays, they go to the students who need to money, but back then, they didn't. That wasn't the focus.</p>
<p>imo, it should all be based on individual qualifications. if two white people vying for the same spot have the same qualifications, one should be chosen at random. same with a white and a hispanic or a black and a black. it shouldnt matter.</p>
<p>Just_Browsing...you recently commented on how people should compare a, per say, "poor white" and a "poor black." OK. Lets compare them. Just Browsing, this isnt an attack against you. I'm just using what you said to try to make another point. Sorry if you get offended in any way.</p>
<p>If a poor white and poor black (both equally disadvantaged) have EXTREMELY similar credentials (one really not better than the other) and they could only accept one one of them, do you think that it would be fair that the URM would be accepted over the white?</p>
<p>If so, why?</p>
<p>I don't think it would be fair at all. I believe that if their race was unknown, they would look over the applications much more thoroughly to pick one, weather it be white or black (or any other URM).</p>
<p>Another situation...</p>
<p>Say a poor white and poor black (both equally disadvantaged) apply to a college. Say the white has better credentials (enough to notice but not a huge difference AT ALL). Do you think it would be fair that the black would prob be chosen over the white because of AA?</p>
<p>If so, why?</p>
<p>And take that same example and insert "rich non-URM" and "rich URM." What do you think?</p>
<p>Now, I understand that colleges wanted to be "diverse" but I think that they should choose people, completely reguardless of race (or as I said before, sex) and have their achievements do the talking. I sincerely believe that a poor URM can do as good/ better than a poor person (not URM) or a rich URM can do as good/better than a rich non URM and I think colleges should treat it that way. </p>
<p>In all respect, AA completely contradicts itself; it ends up promoting discrimination more by lowering and raising the bar (even by slightly) for different types of people.</p>
<p>The problem is cultural. To correct this, we need more education programs in the URM communities to instill the value of education at a young age. By age 18, your views on education are pretty much set whether some Ivy League college gives you a boost in admissions or not. That's why affirmative action does not work. It doesn't act until these kids are already college age. Whites and Asians consistently outperform blacks and hispanics not because of socioeconomic advantages (as evidenced by the fact that poor whites still outperform rich blacks on the SAT's) but because there is no stress on education in the URM community. Shooting free throws is more important than reading the biology textbook. We need to correct that. Affirmative action only addresses the surface of the problem. It gives the politicians an easy way of addressing the "minority problem." Instead, we should be attacking the problem at its roots.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think colleges just want equal representation of all the races in society. Just as they pick and choose among different majors and specialties, they also are trying to build a class based on race. They wouldn't want a whole class full of biology majors; they don't want a whole class full of one race.
That's my perspective on affirmative action.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>lhs,</p>
<p>I think you hit the proverbial nail on the head.</p>