Oh, it’s quite relevant. It’s evidence that the claims you and many others like to make - black students are just as good as whites and Asians; SAT is meaningless; etc. - aren’t true. On average, black students are academically weaker than whites and Asians. So they switch out of STEM at higher rates than whites and Asians.
But if you control for high school qualifications, then they switch at the same rates. That’s the way it should be: I have no reason to expect that a black student with X SAT should be worse than a white or Asian student with X SAT.
Of course at the individual level, people are different. But if we’re comparing a group of black students with X SAT to a group of white or Asian students with X SAT, I shouldn’t expect the percentage of STEM switchers within each group to really differ all that much. And they don’t.
Because I don’t think it matters who majors in science/math/tech vs more humanities-oriented majors. People with an aptitude for one will gravitate to that and people with an aptitude for the other will gravitate to that.
Colleges, other than tech schools, like to have a balance of majors in any case.
OHMom You clearly do not understand fabrizio’s position, given you state “it’s irrelevant…I don’t think it matters who majors in science/math/tech vs more humanities-oriented majors. People with an aptitude for one will gravitate to that and people with an aptitude for the other will gravitate to that.”
Your latter statement is exactly fabrizio’s point. When academic achievement levels are about the same, ethnicity makes no difference in one’s persistence in STEM. However, when there is a huge preference given to ANYONE in the admission process, it results in such a huge academic mismatch. Students who would have persisted in STEM at a school where their academic achievement level is similar, instead switch out to other majors in droves because these students just can’t compete academically with the stronger students.
No one is denigrating non-STEM majors, if that is the chosen direction, but it is a problem if one “gravitates” to non-STEM majors because one is forced out STEM degrees because of grades or the feeling of inadequacy because one is ill prepared to compete against the higher ability students.
You are an example of those individuals who have good intentions in supporting giving URM a helping hand in the admission process at elite institutions, but the unintended consequence to those you wish to help is depriving them of their dreams and goals because these lower achieving students just cannot compete with the much higher achieving student body.
I understand his (your) position. I still think it’s irrelevant to AA or URM consideration in college admissions.
If URMs wish to attend an “easier” STEM school than they get into with some additional consideration at a “harder” school, then they can certainly choose that if they like. I, however, am not going to tell an 18 year old in that situation what’s best for them and I doubt that’s your intention either, though it makes you sound somewhat altruistic to say that is your concern.
Oh the facepalms. I repeated my position THREE TIMES IN A ROW, and still, you did not get it. I doubt saying it a fourth time would make any difference, but whatever - the issue is NOT blacks’ switching majors.
Yes, people choose their majors based on their interests and their talents, or as you said, they “gravitate” according to their “aptitude.” And it’s perfectly, entirely normal for some students, regardless of their racial classification, to switch majors. Interests change, and as students take core classes, they may find that they are better suited for areas that they didn’t originally think they were. THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM.
Again, it isn’t a problem that blacks switch. It isn’t a problem that whites switch. It isn’t a problem that Asians switch. THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM.
The problem is that blacks switch at higher rates than whites and Asians. If we assume that qualifications are the same across groups, I have no reason to expect any difference in switch rates. None whatsoever. Whatever reason you give - “he just didn’t like it” / “she found out she liked something else more” - shouldn’t vary by group. Some people always switch; what reason is there to expect that holding qualifications constant, this varies systematically by racial classification at the group level?
Well, it turns out that if you do control for high school qualifications, so you are comparing “apples to apples,” there is NO DIFFERENCE in switch rates. That makes perfect sense. I have no reason to expect a difference, and there is no difference.
See, here is your problem. I would bet that whatever excuse you give for why blacks switch at higher rates, without controlling for qualifications, is inconsistent with the fact that they switch at the same rates when you do control for qualifications. Because if “he just didn’t like it” is what you want to run with, then even controlling for qualifications, you should still see blacks’ switching at higher rates. But that isn’t what you see in the data.
Why does it matter if students switch majors? Kids change majors ALL the time, and not for your “academic mismatch”. Isn’t college a time to explore and find out what your true interests are? No student should be made to decide their final career path at 17 or 18, no matter what the reason. You seem to be wanting to nitpick something that is not a problem.
I get your point, I really do. It is that black students switch more. I do understand that point. The thing is, who cares if they do and why should that prevent colleges from taking trace into account if they wish?
Let’s say that your point is valid. Black students switch out of some majors and into others that were their second choice due to academic mismatch. Why is it a problem? Those students, like all students, can choose an easier college instead of major they want to. Why not let the students make the call? Why do you feel you need to make it for them?
albert It is about race because URMs are the ones getting the large bulk of the huge preferences for admission into elite schools.It just happens to be that fabrizio’s point is that huge preferences have the same negative effect on all races.
OHMom to answer your question “who cares if they do and why should that prevent colleges from taking trace into account if they wish?” It matters because we as a society want all ethnicity to fulfill one’s dreams/goals. Also it just happens that STEM graduates on average earn $$Thousands more than non-STEM graduates for starting salaries and lifetime earnings, have lower unemployment rates, and greater job opportunities.
There has been a huge push for URMs to obtain STEM degrees by government and entities who support URMs, but the research shows that URMs are more likely than all ethnicity except Asians to start Freshman year wanting a STEM degree. URMs just don’t achieve their goals in large part because of colleges give huge racial preferences “academic mismatch”. If this mismatch is eliminated, then URMs who want to obtain STEM degrees are more likely to achieve their goals. More URM in STEM means that the economic prospects will be better and the children of these graduates will have a better life, and when their children grow up, they too will have greater opportunity.
It is great that elite schools graduate its students at such high rates, but it would be greater if these same elite schools would inform the students of their likelihood of graduating in the area of study that they gravitate so these students can make an informed decision about whether to attend the mismatched elite school or go to a matched school. Or these elite institutions can spend the resources to create programs that help these students to catch up to their higher achieving peers if they are admitted with huge preferences so by the time they are competing with the rest of the class, they have a fighting chance to succeed.
ALL degrees are not equal. A degree in Biology or Engineering leads to greater opportunity than degrees in Ethnic studies or French Literature. Yes, individually, some with the latter degrees may reach high levels of success, but generally speaking those with the former degrees will do better on average.
Yes, “kids change majors all the time.” For whatever reason. Does that mean I should expect blacks to change from STEM to non-STEM MORE OFTEN than whites or Asians?
Please, give me a reason why I should expect blacks to change from STEM to non-STEM AT A HIGHER RATE than whites or Asians. Why shouldn’t it be the same rate?
@voiceofreason66 you make it sound like all you want is the best for those poor black folks who just don’t understand how hard bio will be at Yale compared to yeehaw directional state. I’m sure they appreciate your concern for their future earning power.
Wow, really? Why is it a problem? Who cares? I’d think the students who left not because they didn’t like it or liked something else more but because they felt they were academically weaker than their peers would care. A lot.
Oh, you did understand my point. You knew that academic mismatch was the reason why the switch rates differed depending on whether you controlled for qualifications; you just didn’t want to admit it without first trying to obfuscate the point. No problem. I hope GA2012MOM is the same.
I think your attitude really sums up how racial preferences have become nothing more than an entitlement for so-called “underrepresented” minorities in the U.S. “Let the students make the call.” It’s funny; you’re saying that “URMs” should be given the PRIVILEGE of choosing between schools where they are good fits academically and schools where they may not be able to succeed.
Why should they receive such a privilege? Everyone else only chooses among the schools that are good fits academically. I see no reason why “URMs” should be accorded different treatment in this regard.