"Race" in College Applications FAQ & Discussion

Applying to College
121

<p>I do "realize it." Your entire argument is based on substituting one for the other. I have always said that both are important (preparation and AA), and that the existence of one does not negate the importance of the other. You want only preparation. The colleges do not have the reach to do that. While Harvard, for example, has undertaken recently to travel for the purpose of recruiting, they are not undertaking wholesale college preparation programs. Some of those exist for publics, in the particular states, but not for the private elites, which is the big issue when it comes to AA. Private elites, not U.C., UMich, UVA, etc.</p>

<p>No. (Agreed) AA does not focus on middle school curricula. </p>

<p>Agreed. Utopia is not here yet.</p>

122

<p>I post a chart that contradicts the idea of black vs. white racial disparity being due to income and every single person ignores it. Anyone have any thoughts for my post #108?</p>

123

<p>I think it does contradict the often repeated claim, "The scores are lower because of money."</p>

124

<p>I'm not going to comment too much on this discussion but anyone particularly interested in disparities in educational achievement along with an analysis of relevant socioeconomic and racial factors should check out The Bell Curve. There's a section about the SAT.</p>

<p>VDARE.com:</a> 01/28/07 - What LA Schools Portend: A New, Unequal, People and links on that page, particularly VDARE.com:</a> 10/26/03 - No Excuse For No Excuses and "How</a> to Help the Left Half of the Bell Curve" by Steve Sailer in VDARE.com, provide an alternative albeit polemical, sometimes politically incorrect point of view.</p>

125

<p>Understand that money is not a cause ("because of") but a correlation. What money also tends to correlate with is an educated household, which in turn is more a predictor of academic ambition & success than money per se. (Again, there are recent studies on this.) <em>Overall</em>, not on a case-by-case basis, educated parents produce students most inclined to attend college, & most able to. (Most able to includes standardized test preparation & results.)</p>

<p>As to blacks with lower IQ's, and the possible reason(s) for that, the intent of AA (again) is not to close all socioeconomic & racial disparities in the nation, nor to focus on IQ-compromised students. The argument that because many URM's have lower IQ's and/or poor test results, and (therefore) should not be admitted to an elite college, is a straw man argument. Those students are not elite college material, period. Nor are the low-income, blue-collar-family, white & immigrant students I serve. Most of my students are headed for community college, trades, or mid-level state colleges.</p>

<p>Most students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, whatever the race, are not headed for the Ivies. Usually that's due to a combination of factors, not income alone or race alone, but the presence or absence in the household of a 'culture of education,' the possible unusual opportunity to attend a well-performing school, and personal drive. The Ivies are only interested in those that are promising.</p>

126

<p>
[quote]
Are you talking about equality of opportunity, or equality of result? If you’re talking about the former, then I’m with you all the way. I believe every child in our nation should have a shot at higher education if he so desires. However, if you’re talking about the latter, then count on me to oppose you every step of the way. I do not believe that anyone is entitled or guaranteed a place in higher education by virtue of his skin color.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>^and this is the disrupt in reasoning that I believe distorts many high school students and others views on AA. College is not a result, or a reward, or solely a desire. It is an opportunity, and all universities will acknowledge it as that. Thus, if you support equality of opportunity you should not oppose AA based on the above fact; but I do not expect that changes your opinion on AA as equal opportunities is only a facet of my support of it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Another fundamental point of difference. Let’s assume an admissions policy that is almost identical to what we have today except that it is race-netural. Let’s further assume that it results in college enrollments that are overwhelmingly black. Here’s where you and I differ. You think that this result is a problem. I don’t. I see no problem whatsoever. </p>

<p>"What "race-blind" admissions guarantees currently is an overwhelming presence of upper-middle class whites & Asians, + a near-disappearance of low-income southeast Asians, blacks, Hispanics, and whites."</p>

<p>I ask you, what is so wrong about this? As your paragraphs so clearly demonstrate, you can only accept a scenario where there are more “underrepresented” minorities but not an “overwhelming presence.” I can accept all scenarios: more, same, less. This is why your ideology will lose in the end. Yours is one that is too rigid.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's true that there is a fundamental difference, but you are mistaken, at least as far as I'm concerned, with where that difference is. If a school had the representation you alluded to based on the definition of meritocracy you support, sure I would oppose their admissions practices and the diversity, but I would simply apply to another school because I have the option. </p>

<p>Despite persistent attempts at categorization, I am not simply a "supporter of race preferences." I am an advocate for racial diversity and its contribution to an intellectual environment (I plan to write an article for CC regarding the merits of this; if I wasn't sure before, returning from TASP I have no doubts). And I am support universities with those shared values. I view AA Ideologically consistent the idea that colleges should build student bodies to their vision. </p>

<p>But what if a school's vision was to have an all white or all asian student body?</p>

<p>I would fundamentally oppose the school personally and not apply because that school is inconsistent with my values. I also believe the public has business opposing the practice because segregation in educate is not a compelling interest.</p>

<p>But I believe that scenario is a non-issue as those with the best schools in higher education are well aware of the immense benefits of racial diversity. </p>

<p>Image:1995-SAT-Income2.png</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</p>

<p>I'll repost the graph since for reference. I also supplement this issue with the fact, contrary to token adult's post, asians at the lowest economic bracket outperform african americans at the highest. In fact, when you factor out income the gap is still just as glaringly large. (I'll update with the article that cites this, i'm sure I've posted it before and I believe it was published by JBHE if anyone wants to look it up). </p>

<p>Of course, much of the gap occurs between the grades 3 and 8, but higher education is still education. Fixing primary and secondary education, socioeconomic AA and race/gender/diversity AA, none of those are incompatible, and all build on the same goal of the best opportunities for everyone. </p>

<p>To attest to this on the racial level, i cite Study</a> of Affirmative Action at Top Schools Cites Far-Reaching Benefits</p>

<p>It's not the only article I saw the facts in, and not even the one I'm looking for, but it shows that this evidence is being overlooked.</p>

<p>We have all read the recent studies that find that among white and asians, there is no long term benefit in income from attending an elite school if you had the stats to be accepted to one and opted to go to a "non-elite" one. Even among the white and asian poor the benefit is small. But as that article cites </p>

<p>"Blacks who graduate from elite colleges earn 70 percent to 85 percent more than do black graduates generally"</p>

<p>Another article which I am still searching for, cites this same fact and shows that blacks from all brackets benefit the most from an elite education, attesting that higher education is still an opportunity, not a result. </p>

<p>To close, I've grown up around chicago public schools, known for some of the largest racial disparities in the nation; only 3% of black an latino males graduate. Whether they want to or not, blacks are forced to identify as black either by association, or by societal exclusion (not necessarily malicious intent). </p>

<p>When the group you identify with empirically, and based on media images, is less educated, more into crime and in prison, highly sexualized, only successful in sports and music,..., how does this impact your self image and how you aspire to achieve success? And how does this affect those of other groups who have no evidence to prove that those situations are often not true?</p>

<p>Finally, how can higher education play a role in correcting these acknowledged societal interests. And how does Affirmative Action work counter to this goal?</p>

127

<p>
[quote]
Despite persistent attempts at categorization, I am not simply a "supporter of race preferences."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You support AA. (1)</p>

<h2>AA gives preference to certain racial groups, all else being equal. (2)</h2>

<p>By (1) and (2), you support racial preferences.</p>

<p>There's nothing inherently wrong with this--it's what the whole debate is about. Why can't you just be up front about it?</p>

128

<p>weasel - If you want to make a fruit salad and you already have 16 bananas and 20 oranges, does going to the store and selecting 3 apples (and no bananas or oranges) mean that you prefer apples, or discriminate against bananas and oranges? No, it simply means you want some of each.</p>

129

<p>note the qualifier "simply." I support schools that seek a racially diverse student body when selecting a class. By extension, I support both schools that take race into account and schools that do not but still have a racially diverse environment. </p>

<p>Black students at elite universities (from above article) "after graduation, the survey found, these students achieve notable successes. They earn advanced degrees at rates identical to those of their white classmates. They are even slightly more likely than whites from the same institutions to obtain professional degrees in law, business and medicine. And they become more active than their white classmates in civic and community activities.</p>

<p>The authors call black graduates of elite institutions "the backbone of the emergent black middle class" and say that their influence extends well beyond"</p>

<p>In addition "Blacks and whites report fairly substantial social interaction at college, which they say helped them relate to members of different racial groups later in life. Finally, the more selective the college, the more likely were blacks who attended it to graduate, obtain advanced degrees and earn high salaries"</p>

<p>So yes, I "support" AA in the same way that you "oppose" the emergence of a strong black middle class and increased racial interaction and understanding.</p>

130

<p>Weasel, sometimes reducing a complex argument or position is a distortion of that argument, position, policy. AA is not the equivalent of a prime number. It's a mixed number.</p>

131

<p>Extending Bay's analogy:</p>

<p>If I don't have the fruit to begin with, but I know I want a variety, I may go to the store and find an abundance of beautiful bananas & beautiful oranges. It will be hard to choose from among the best of those -- most of them looking virtually equal in quality. Probably 90% of them will be temporarily left on the produce shelf until some other equally lucky consumer discovers them. Perhaps they should file claims with civil agencies for being discriminated against.</p>

132

<p>


</p>

<p>This is an interesting analogy. First, I'll suggest a few improvements to it which shouldn't be controversial, and then I'll attempt to rebut your point. First, how about instead of several different fruits, we limit the discussion to different varieties of apples? It seems to be in keeping with tokenadult's desire to emphasize our common humanity. ;) So I've got 16 Granny Smith apples and 12 Red Delicious apples. Any good apple connoisseur would point out that Gala apples are underrepresented in my kitchen cabinet. So I go to the store and I pick out a few Gala apples to try to make up for this. Does this mean I prefer Galas? As in the original analogy, no it does not. But I'm not sure this really captures what's going on with AA. What if, instead, I keep going to the grocery store on a regular basis, and each time I buy 16 granny smiths, 12 red delicious, and 3 Galas, even though the Galas aren't as fresh and occasionally have some dents in them? [insert potentially offensive bad apple joke here] Do I have a general preference for Gala apples? There's not enough information to say definitively. But at the margin, which is really all that matters in the context of college admissions, a high quality Gala has a better chance of being picked than a high quality Granny Smith. That's what I, and presumably others, are getting at when we use the term racial preferences--ceteris parabus, a preference at the margin.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>They also have a bad habit of flunking the bar exam. I'm sure fabrizio will be more than happy to cite the study.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Who said I didn't like AA? I'm undecided on the subject, but I don't like how supporters are so afraid to own up to the fact that they support racial preferences, if only in the short term.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>This is undoubtedly true. But where did I distort anything?</p>

133

<p>"a high quality Gala has a better chance of being picked than a high quality Granny Smith."</p>

<p>Mathematically, yes. Is this what it's all about to some of the doubters & opposers? You object to non-even mathematical possibilities? Are you all math majors? Setting aside the subject of personal origins, in a diversity of <em>talent</em>, it's simply not possible to have an equal chance of admission to an Elite, as someone else. Because even among the Granny Smiths, there are the large variety and the small variety, the organic and non-organic, some crisper, some denser, and I still may have intelligent reasons for wanting non-sameness in the Granny Smiths. I may want to choose some granny smiths not locally grown. I may understand that variety makes the ultimate product more pleasantly complex.</p>

<p>Weasel, I only meant 'distort' in the sense that reduction can amount to distortion, and that 'preferences' per se is non-existent without the 'everything else being equal' comment that you added. (Because usually, opposers of AA conveniently leave out that important qualifier, without which 'preferences' is non-operative.) </p>

<p>Secondly, 'preferences' implies an absolute. Thirdly, preferences strongly implies an intent to eliminate, based on that characteristic alone, which is a distortion of AA.</p>

134

<p>
[quote]
What if, instead, I keep going to the grocery store on a regular basis, and each time I buy 16 granny smiths, 12 red delicious, and 3 Galas, even though the Galas aren't as fresh and occasionally have some dents in them? [insert potentially offensive bad apple joke here] Do I have a general preference for Gala apples?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Using your analogy, one could argue that you obviously have a general preference for granny smiths and red delicious, NOT for Galas. One could also argue that your selection criteria is skewed in favor of the granny smiths and red delicious. Are the Gala's edible? Do they successfully make a decent pie? If so, then perhaps you are overlooking the value of the variety that the Galas bring to your family's diet and how your choice benefits the Gala growers of America.</p>

135

<p>
[quote]

^and this is the disrupt in reasoning that I believe distorts many high school students and others views on AA. College is not a result, or a reward, or solely a desire. It is an opportunity, and all universities will acknowledge it as that. Thus, if you support equality of opportunity you should not oppose AA based on the above fact; but I do not expect that changes your opinion on AA as equal opportunities is only a facet of my support of it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You took my paragraph out of context. I was responding to the following from areyouseriousss:</p>

<p>* If you really want an equal society, a society where it * actually doesn't matter what skin color you have or what gender you are or what gender you're attracted to or whatever, you have to give the people who never had a chance a chance.</p>

<p>Given his use of “give [them]
a chance,” I understood that areyouseriousss wanted to guarantee a certain level of enrollment for certain groups. That is equality of result, the belief that X is not equal unless every group who participates in X is “fairly” represented. I don’t support equality of result.</p>

136

<p>
[quote]

But what if a school's vision was to have an all white or all asian student body?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First, this is a straw man. Second, if such a school were actually to exist, then it would have to be private. Even then, it’s not guaranteed that the school would pass Constitutional muster. For sure, no public school can say, “we serve only one race.” That practice has been illegal for over half a century.</p>

<p>
[quote]

It's not the only article I saw the facts in, and not even the one I'm looking for, but it shows that this evidence is being overlooked.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The funny thing is that despite being the definitive defense of racial preferences, The Shape of the River actually contains some statements that contradict several common pro-racial preference claims.</p>

<p>I always hear stuff like, “Race isn’t that big of a deal in affirmative action.” Drs. Bowen and Bok themselves admit that absent “race-conscious” admissions, “underrepresented” minority enrollment would precipitously drop. As an example, epiphany has never directly admitted that race is, in fact, a big deal. She just says it in a roundabout way: if you have race-blind admissions, then there will be an “overwhelming presence” of whites and Asians. Uh huh, so race isn’t that important, but if you remove it, then the numbers change wildly. OK
that’s really convincing.</p>

<p>Furthermore, the evidence is not being overlooked. Rather, there's no way to challenge it! Bowen and Bok’s study is fundamentally flawed in one key aspect: transparency. All the data used in that study comes from the Mellon Foundation, but the foundation won’t let grant just anyone access to the data. If you want to double check their results, sorry, that’s a no-no. You have to “offer sound reasons for believing that there is a likelihood of error or misinterpretation in the work of others.” As Matthew Continetti aptly noted, that’s tantamount to saying, “Before you can prove me wrong, you have to prove me wrong.” My head hurts.</p>

137

<p>I’ve noticed that at least two users here have said there is no inconsistency between supporting both racial preferences and enhanced preparation.</p>

<p>Take a look at what epiphany has said - What "race-blind" admissions guarantees currently is an overwhelming presence of upper-middle class whites & Asians, + a near-disappearance of low-income southeast Asians, blacks, Hispanics, and whites. In other words, without racial preferences, students who are neither white nor Asian can’t make it. As Dr. Shelby Steele has noted, racial preferences tell the intended beneficiaries, “you can’t make it unless we give you a boost.”</p>

<p>However, enhanced preparation sends a completely different message: “you can make it without any artificial boosts!”</p>

<p>One guy’s telling you that absent a preference, you’ll never get there. The other guy’s telling you that you don’t need any preferences, I’ll help you become a stronger candidate so you can compete with others. That’s why the two negate each other.</p>

138

<p>
[quote]
Mathematically, yes. Is this what it's all about to some of the doubters & opposers? You object to non-even mathematical possibilities? Are you all math majors?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I am. ;)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Setting aside the subject of personal origins, in a diversity of <em>talent</em>, it's simply not possible to have an equal chance of admission to an Elite, as someone else.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fair enough. Assign to each applicant a rating (some real number between 0 and 100 for example) made without regard to race. If applicant A has a higher rating than applicant B, then the college in question prefers applicant A. Now assume that there is a quantifiable "AA bump" a la University of Michigan. Even if no two applicants have the same rating, they could very well have ratings which are close enough that the AA bump reverses their order in the rankings. I realize that these are big assumptions that don't reflect the way admissions works. I'm simply trying to present a heuristic that demonstrates why two applicants don't have to be the exact same for racial preferences to have a meaning based in reality.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Using your analogy, one could argue that you obviously have a general preference for granny smiths and red delicious, NOT for Galas. One could also argue that your selection criteria is skewed in favor of the granny smiths and red delicious.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes you could. But to the apple, my general preference doesn't matter. All that matters is my marginal preference. It's like the distinction between average and marginal cost in economics. </p>

<p>I'm starting to wonder if the argument we're having is even meaningful. Are we debating semantics or facts? When I use the term racial preferences, I mean preference at the margin ceteris parabus. So to Bay, epiphany, Tyler09, et al: do you deny that this occurs or do you not like calling it "racial preferences"? The term seems apt to me, but I'm open to other suggestions.</p>

139

<p>fabrizio, I think that AA and preparation programs send messages that are slightly different from what you suggest. I think AA says "You can't do it alone in the short run" while prep programs say "You can do it alone in the long run" ("you" referring to the general population of URMs). I don't see the contradiction.</p>

140

<p>^ You're right; there isn't one. It's two different efforts, but some of the URM's admitted to Elites have also benefited from 'preparation programs' which allow them to be even in the running in the first place. Again, it's extremely rare that someone with a significant disadvantaged background on several levels (culturally, economically, educationally) will just "on his own" be able to be competitive for elite college admissions.</p>

<p>Those of us parents with students home from elites have received an earful about the level of talent in the classroom. It's a whole different level of excellence than was imaginable on the high school level -- even the very high-achieving high schools. The college would have no interest in admitting students who cannot make it in that environment.</p>