<p>@GA2012MOM
I understand that there’s still racism against URM’s, but don’t you think there’s still racism against ORM’s (like Asians, Indians, etc.) that makes it harder to get jobs (just like it is for URM’s)? Keep in the mind the affirmative action doesn’t hurt whites, to check “white privilege”, rather it takes seats/spots away from overrepresented minorities such as Asians who likely still face discrimination in society and the workforce in the current world. So do you really support the current form of affirmative action which punishes another minority group for being too high-achieving to help under-represented minorities? I would think about supporting affirmative action that actually checked “white privilege” by making it harder for them to get in and easier for all minorities (including Asians), but most definitely not in its current form in which it unfairly punishes one minority group to help others.
On a side note, i’m in strong favor of socioecnomic based affirmative action, but that doesn’t tend to really bring URM’s into college (see UC and berkeley), likely because asians and whites in teh same neighborhoods tend to (not every case) work harder than the URM’s. </p>
<p>I never understood the line of arguing that if you have not experienced something then one is not in position to dispute the logic of an argument. That is contrary to the fact that we are rational, intelligent beings and experience is not necessary to understand and process something. </p>
<p>Anyway, experience has nothing to do with the point @fabrizio is making. All he is saying is one action does not justify the other. No experience required to deduce that.</p>
<p>First there is no difference as far as I am concerned between an African American that comes from the legacy of the south and Jim Crow or someone who is first generation from Nigeria. So many of the same hurdles exist for both entities and due to the cultural indoctrination that exists in our country we will bring a wealth of thoughts, ideas and diversity to a college campus. No one is being punished, I think it’s very difficult to claim that as a group if you make up 5% of the country that somehow if on a campus you make up 18% of the population that they’re is some inherent discrimination going on. There just seems to be so much angst about so few spots. In all likelihood Yale admitted less than 8 or 9 percent of black students who applied which led to a grand total of 147 black kids enrolled in 2013. I think it’s safe to say that at least 3/4 of those kids reside in the 25/75 CDS ratio test wise So let’s say 35 kids were in the bottom 25 percent. Out of the 2000 kids who we’re admitted. Do you really think that those spots cost a particular person or ethnic group. There are far more athletes, musicians, legacies etc… Spots that would be a more useful target of some uneasiness. Yet I hope we wouldn’t, it is an imperfect system, there is no perfect one. However the coalition of people who exist on these campuses are the reason so many people from so many different callings hope to find a place among them. </p>
<p>See the UC’s and Berkeley in particular after they did away with affirmative action (they still took socioeconomic background strongly into account). Without affirmative action Asians would likely make up close to 40% of the campuses at least, not just under 20%.
African immigrants tend to be highly educated and pretty rich, not poor or really in need of help from the system.
Fact is you provide the same resources (same town/neighborhood) on average, Asians will outperform whites who outperform URM’s because their culture ( and parents etc) place a lot more emphasis on it. So affirmative action punishes Asians for being more high-achieving on average and helps URM’s because on average they perform worse.</p>
<p>This only has merit if your sole admissions requirement are the standardized tests. There is no doubt that Asians do extremely well in standardized testing. But with the exception of a few schools the preponderance of the elite universities have stated that test scores are only a part of the process not the entire process. Your theories on work ethic and parental involvement I would question. It seems to me that some of the premise of your argument is that you desire to have applications read in a non sociological setting. Yet you keep ascribing traits to people based on race and as a group that are purely subjective. I would think this would be what you are trying to avoid. I don’t know how hard your family worked on what role culture has played in your life. And you do not know what it has played in mine. The process is subjective and holistic because these decisions can only be made by interpreting each candidate as an individual not a number. </p>
<p>Why does holistic have to include racial classification? </p>
<p>I’ve always felt that race is simply semantic for culture. The idea is to have a student body that creates an environment with the best of all things if possible. Yes there is an individual component to the process but there is also a categorical part as well. The idea of a campus that has a little bit of everything means you are as a participant exposed to a host of different ideas, culture, habits etc… The socialization part of academia is just as important as the academic part. We all know that a person can achieve academic excellence if motivated just sitting in front of a computer. But the best part of my education was the interaction that took place in groups of people who came from a far different world than I did. </p>
<p>So what’s okay about having the majority of campuses as white? Why can’t the largest group be Asians in the same proportion instead?
These were the arguments used to keep Jews out of top colleges in the first half of the 20th century (in fact holistic admissions were started for this very reason) and it’s sickening to see them applied to Asians today.</p>
<p>@Mayihelp It’s not race, it’s the culture; Asian parents (especially immigrants) stress education far more on average than other parents do, why do you think you usually see Asian kids complain about their parents with regards to education far more than kids of other races. This is a cultural characteristic; in fact African immigrants (especially from Nigeria and Ghana) often have parents who stress the same,
Asians are not just test takers, that racist stereotype is uneducated and insulting. Asians play sports (admittedly usually not good enough to get recruited; that’s based more on natural talent and there are far fewer Asians than other people so less Asians with the athletic talent), very good at instruments, high grades, very involved in clubs and other school organizations. Berkeley (and UC’s) use holistic admissions, and even take socioeconomic background very strongly into account, but Berkeley still has about 43% Asian population, and the Asian part of Berkeley rose so much once they did away with affirmative action there, I think Asians are the largest ethnic group in the UC system as a whole as well.
I am very strongly in favor of socioeconomic action, I just don’t think that a black kid living in the same rich neighborhood as an Asian kid with equally rich if not richer parents to have it easier for college admissions, especially when both are minority groups in this country and if white privilege still exists they’d still suffer from discrimination,</p>
<p>I simply cannot abide your level of stereotyping. I do not see the world that racially defined to the point you can make a determination about someone’s intelligence, work ethic or desire based on anecdotes and what you’ve heard. You don’t know whether my children complained or didn’t complain about what was required and I do not know of yours. You do not know whether a parent from Ghana stressed academics more in the home than a parent who is 6th generation from the south. I understand the bane of your argument but you tend to lose sight of the individual. I wish you all the best but I think I’ll move on. Thanks</p>
<p>Nowhere did I say that this is all people of one race, I said in general, as in take the average child of one group. I thought I used tend to or on average or generally. Do you have an explanation for why Asian Americans are overrepresented in top colleges (despite affirmative action) other than that they on average (not I said on average) tend to overachieve? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Racial preferences don’t guarantee that you are exposed to different ideas, culture, and habits. </p>
<p>I’ve haven’t said anything about racial preferences. The culture of any race, creed, religion etc… Is not monolithic. However there are some common threads of experiences that do exist and are beneficial to a collegiate atmosphere. I feel strongly that a diverse student body benefits a campus environment. Your life experiences are impacted by your social standing, race, family history etc… Anyone who exists has been exposed to different ideas, culture and habits. Those who are successful academically tend to be even more curious about and expressive of those experiences</p>
<p>So I guess you’re one of those people that derides Berkeley .</p>
<p>I think Berkeley is one of the premier institutions in the world academically. I would have no question or hesitation to send my child there if that’s was the place he or she decided to attend school. The only thing I question about Berkeley is the size of the school. Class enrollment for certain courses is a challenge. Has also felt like more of a stem school than humanities. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Can you get a “diverse student body” without considering racial classification in admissions?</p>
<p>No you cannot but that doesn’t necessarily imply preference. Preference implies that a school prefers one student over another. In the Ivy League the variance in admission rate is minimal. It’s safe to say for example at Yale 7 % of white students who apply are admitted and maybe a little over 8% of black students are admitted. That wouldn’t indicate preference. Especially when considering black enrollment in the Ivy League hovers around the 8% mark which is less than the population as a whole</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why not?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not safe to say that at all. [600/800</a> is the 94th percentile in critical reading for blacks, the 71st percentile for Asians, and the 75th for whites.](<a href=“http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/SAT-Percentile-Ranks-By-Gender-Ethnicity-2013.pdf]600/800”>Home – SAT Suite of Assessments | College Board) There simply are not enough high-scoring (i.e. 700 or higher) blacks in the country for all the private elites to have their “diversity” “goals” met. They must admit lower scoring blacks.</p>
<p>This is where you say the SAT isn’t everything. True. It isn’t, nor should it be. But why don’t these schools similarly admit lower scoring whites and Asians?</p>
<p>They do, you are assuming that only URM’s make up the lower 25% in testing That is clearly not the case and any ad com would tell you so. The holistic approach benefits all parties as we’ve seen on this site students of all types who did not have scores above the mean. And again I know this is redundant the test is only a part of the process that diminishes as you go deeper into the evaluation. If the process was solely based on test scores you would have an extremely objective process however admissions to the Ivy League and most other elite institutions have never been an objective process. For what reason would they change now with their popularity at all time highs. </p>
<p>I’ve posted this anecdote before in response to this discussion, which we all know will continue indefinitely. When visiting Yale with my URM daughter, the info session presenter said it best. “It would be a disservice to fill a classroom with 20 other students who LOOK like you do.” I could tell he phrased it that way intentionally. The ivies and top institutions believe there is an academic imperative to expose their student body to a cross-section of humanity. Why? Because of inherent prejudices plaguing our society, some quite pointedly detailed here. People of certain racial appearance being stopped, questioned, judged, SHOT. They want the best of the best to learn acceptance and respect for those from a very different perspective than themselves. </p>
<p>As I have also said before, if you disagree then these institutions are not for you.</p>