"Race" in College Applications FAQ & Discussion

Applying to College
141

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, just to be clear, I’m not happy that black law school students flunk the bar exam at far higher rates than their white peers. However, I am happy that there is a solution. The study comes from Dr. Richard Sander, a law professor at UCLA. It’s called [A</a> Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools]( <a href=“http://www.law.ucla.edu/sander/Systemic/final/SanderFINAL.pdf]A”>http://www.law.ucla.edu/sander/Systemic/final/SanderFINAL.pdf).</p>

<p>To be precise, Sander documents that black law school students are nearly 2.5 times as likely as their white peers to not graduate, four times as likely to fail the bar exam on their first try, and six times as likely to never pass. Sander also claims that none of his many critics have ever denied these facts.</p>

142

<p>

</p>

<p>Fair enough. I revise my argument to say that if we really focus on K-12 education and college preparation, which is what California has done post-Proposition 209, then there’s no need for race-based affirmative action.</p>

143

<p>

</p>

<p>To me, it is a preference for racial diversity, not any particular race. </p>

<p>Sorry to extend the analogy, but in my mind, the difference between the pro- and anti-racial diversity folks is that one sees value in the mixed fruit salad, and the other doesn’t care if s/he only gets bananas. You are correct that the individual piece of fruit does not “care” if s/he not selected, but the health of the family (society) and the economic status of the fruit growers (URMs) are negatively impacted if some of each fruit is not selected.</p>

144

<p>Remember that not everyone who opposes AA opposes racial diversity. To claim otherwise is sort of like saying civil libertarians don’t care about catching criminals.</p>

145

<p>Absolutely. (Post 143) Fabrizio has said, including on this thread, What would be the harm in (equivalently) having only bananas, or only bananas & oranges? Colleges think it’s harmful, that’s why. And when (if) the K-12 improved education for URM’s results in their advancement to indistinguishable competitiveness with the oranges & bananas (which is not happening tomorrow; don’t delude yourself too much), we will have all 3 groups filing civil claims: the bananas, the oranges, and the apples as well, because then we will have an overabundance of high-end qualification of all possible representable groups on campus, and even <em>more</em> ‘qualfied’ students will be rejected. And <em>still</em> the colleges will be making selections BOTH on the basis of overall competitiveness with the entire pool AND on the basis of competitiveness within the individual’s school, the individual’s region, etc. Because the intent of the college is to acquire as mixed a class of excellence as possible, partitioning as an aspect of that effort will always be a part of the process. If there are too many excellent artists or excellent linguists than can be absorbed, they are not all getting in, no matter what their race or races, what their K-12 preparation was, etc.</p>

146

<p>K-12 education can’t accomplish that unless families relinquish control of their children to the state. The educational system can compensate for parents who aren’t capable of helping their children with their homework but do care about whether or not their children complete it, but it can’t make up for families that don’t care if their children attend school or do their homework.</p>

147

<p>

</p>

<p>True, and I did not say that they do. But unless it can be shown that racially diverse campuses “happen on their own,” it is impossible that it matters very much to them whether a campus is racially diverse or not.</p>

148

<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.”</p>

<p>^still thinking of college as a result or endgame, it’s another opportunity. An elite university admission also says “I’ll help you become a stronger candidate so you can compete with others” and as statistics show it indeed does. </p>

<p>And when you say boost, what boost are you referring to? Surely not a boost in the non-existent meritocracy of others perceptions of what is valuable? And a boost to what? Since admissions is an opportunity just as much as K-12 and not a prize, I’m not quite sure what anyone should be ashamed of being boosted to?</p>

<p>I’m missing the difference. How is targeting low income and minority students for the educational resources and guidence of an elite university any different than for tutoring and academic-help programs at the K-12 level. It’s still education and preparation right?</p>

149

<p>epiphany,</p>

<p>That’s not what I said. How did you end up with an “overwhelming presence” of whites and Asians? Did you do it by refusing to consider the applications of non-white and non-Asian students? Did you do it by imposing looser standards on whites and Asians? Tougher standards on non-whites and non-Asians? Or, did you do it by treating everyone equally without regard to race? If you ended up with that overwhelming presence by discriminating against non-whites and non-Asians or by preferentially treating whites and Asians, then I think there are some serious problems. However, if you got it because you set a uniform standard for all, then no, there’s nothing wrong with your “overwhelming presence.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I can’t help but guffaw. You’re saying that even if “underrepresented” minorities completely close the GPA and SAT gaps, whites and Asians would still file Jian Li-style civil rights complaints. Please, please tell me that I have misunderstood you. I really want you to tell me that I misunderstood you, because if I understood you correctly, then that’s just a joke. Why did Bakke file suit against the UC system? Why did Gratz and Grutter file suits against Michigan? Why did Li file a complaint against Princeton? Did any of them claim, “There are too many qualified students of all races! I want more of my race represented!” You know the answer as well as I do: no.</p>

150

<p>Tyler09,</p>

<p>I’m not talking about result, and I’m not talking about opportunity. I’m talking about equality of result, and I’m talking about equality of opportunity. It seems that you either don’t know what those are, or you’re purposely ignoring my comment that you took my paragraph out of context, or both.</p>

<p>Boost is a synonym for racial preference.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>There is no difference between “targeting low income…students for the educational resources and guidance of an elite university” and “tutoring and academic-help programs at the K-12 level [open to all students].” When did I say there was one?</p>

151

<p>

</p>

<p>UC not diverse enough for you? Who’s the arbiter of what constitutes diversity and what constitutes an “overwhelming presence”? When is representation of one group “too much” or “too little”? What’s the magic number, Bay?</p>

152

<p>i just assumed you were for programs to help women and minorities get ahead like some 80% of the population. </p>

<p>Your views are very utopian, i don’t believe they are applicable when different help means different thing to different people. </p>

<p>How do you suggest closing, specifically, the racial achievement gap? Or do you believe it is not an issue of societal concern.</p>

<p>^and Cal with virtually no black non-athletes is not diverse to me. Cal doesn’t think it is a diverse enough place either, note efforts to increase minority enrollment and their stalwart opposition to 209. I think the Cali voters were wrong to curtail a large aspect of the selection of their student body. I will not apply to Cal for this reason.</p>

153

<p>Tyler09, earlier you asked how K-12 programs are any different from the opportunities that an elite education provide. I prefer programs which try to benefit disadvantaged students while those students are relatively young. If a disadvantaged student gets access to tutors at an early age, that negatively affects me (since those tutors could be helping me), but not to the same extent that AA has the potential to negatively affect me. The sooner that we attempt to provide assistance to disadvantaged kids, the quicker these kids can make it on their own. I know your response will be “Why not have AA and prep programs?”, and I’m not sure I have an answer. I’m just saying why one is less objectionable to me personally.</p>

154

<p>Cal is not diverse enough for an awful lot of students, including those with a heavy representation there (Asians and whites), who are choosing to apply elsewhere or enroll elsewhere. Not diverse enough for my ORM daughter, either, who was admitted.</p>

155

<p>With some exceptions (e.g., Caltech,) I don’t think the quality of education or rigor is different among the top 25 schools or so. Some people might argue that this span is larger. However, there is a big difference in the prestige of the degree. I think this is part of the reason that having a degree from an elite college is viewed more as an award rather than strictly an educational opportunity. Having a gold medal at the Pan American Games may be as hard as getting one at the olympics, but olympic gold always will have more luster.</p>

156

<p>Tyler09,</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So if I don’t share your support for racial preferences, I’m not for helping “underrepresented” minorities? (Women are not underrepresented in undergraduate admissions.) Moreover, “programs to help women and minorities” is so vague. Are you talking about un-Constitutional programs like what UC did in Bakke and what Michigan did in Gratz? Or, are you talking about programs like EAOP, MESA, Puente, and FFWD ([Source](<a href=“http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/edlite-raceneutralreport2.html]Source[/url]”>http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/edlite-raceneutralreport2.html)</a>)? I don’t support the former, but I strongly support the latter.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Racial preferences don’t close the achievement gap. End the preferences and focus on things that actually do close the gap. What are these “things”? I don’t know exactly. Whatever they are, racial preferences do nothing to solve them.</p>

157

<p>So epiphany and Tyler09, you can only answer my first question? You can’t answer any of the following?</p>

<p>Who’s the arbiter of what constitutes diversity and what constitutes an “overwhelming presence”? When is representation of one group “too much” or “too little”? What’s the magic number?</p>

158

<p>fab, there is no absolute or arbitrary number or percentage. </p>

<p>I’ve discussed parallel examples before. (Parallel hypotheticals, in which the same concepts would be applied if they were applicable – such as an overrepresentation of a group that is currently underrepresented.) </p>

<p>The goal is always excellence, period. (I’ve also said before that if excellence were limited to a certain group, or a certain region, etc., that group would have the dominating presence at that elite college, despite numbers. Reputations are far too important to colleges.) If there weren’t more than enough capable students of many origins (not perfect, not ‘the ultimate’ in k-12 education, but capable of challenging academic work), the student bodies might continue to be as lopsidedly upper & upper-middle class today as they were in 1964 (just with a duo-tone today look instead of the monochrome look then).</p>

<p>Clearly the admissions committees, and their advising personnel & boards, make those calls, and those calls differ slightly each year, depending on the supply of excellent apps & the locations of those apps. (For example, geographically I believe TX, PA, CA, & MD particularly gained in representation about 4 yrs ago, due to an increase in excellent applications from those states.) </p>

<p>(You’re focusing on race, when race is but one of about 15 admission elements. Geography and many other factors are considered.)</p>

<p>If admission were only about academic performance, your (eventual) k-12 preparation preference would be logical. Problem is, so much more than academic performance, as measured by grades & test scores, are considered. And that is precisely the reason why one sees so many rejections & waitlists of way more ORM’s than the tiny # of URM’s admitted to Elites each year. </p>

<p>When a college <em>also</em> needs more wind musicians than strings, when they need students keen on debate, or students with a journalism track record to maintain a legendary college publication, or a few key students to populate a Classics Dept., that college may not find such students among the 2400/4.0 group. (May or may not. ) Or they may find such needed students among the 2400/4.0 group, but may seek the ones applying from the Far West or the South from that subset.</p>

<p>When one gets to a certain saturation point of ‘qualification,’ – on the part of the individual student and as a whole in the application pool, the hierachy of qualification peaks, and one is then looking at many desirable aspects of diversity. </p>

<p>So in itself, and even with a “race-blind” admission policy, admissions may never be geography-blind, income-blind, academic-major-blind, e.c.-blind.</p>

159

<p>re 156:
Why do you assume that CalTech is more rigorous? (If you do) </p>

<p>As to difference between perceived award & actual opportunity, I agree with you to some extent, but the perception is the problem of the public, not a responsibility of the college, & certainly not a legal or civil rights concept.</p>

160

<p>epiphany,</p>

<p>I request clarification from you. In post #145, did you suggest that even if “underrepresented” minorities completely close the GPA and SAT gaps, whites and Asians would still file Jian Li-style civil rights complaints?</p>