<p>are to assume that both of these students have the same qualifications? If that's the came probably both will get in. Are we to assume the "wealthy black student from Beverly Hills and private school" is not qualfied to enter whatever college you're discussing? It's ridiculous to assume that race is the ONLY thing that this Black (probably well qualified) student has. He is probably well traveled, well educated and well qualified. Not only that, he will be paying full tuition (like most of the wealthy Black students that I know in elite schools). It's a myth that Black students get so much financial aid. And, it's true wealthy white males have the advantage in college admissions.</p>
<p>Naturally it should be assumed that these two individuals are equal in all other stats. There would be no point in comparing a wealthy black student with a 2400, trivarsity sports, 4.0 gpa, and olympic runner with a poor white boy with a 2.1 gpa and a 17 ACT with no extracurriculars other than 'coon hunting.</p>
<p>I am just curious which will tip the scale a bit more. Please just answer my question without claiming that I am "bashing on blacks". This thread seems to attract many self important idiots who take pleasure in suggesting I am against colored individuals. Among many caucasians, racism seems to be a way of life, but why would I bother to "bash blacks" when I am a colored person myself?</p>
<p>what do you mean "colored". Are you from South Africa?</p>
<p>The rich black would def win. The superficial point of AA, to help minorities, really has another goal, to help people of lower income and saying it is based on race. Therefore, a system designed to help people with less opporutnities would in this case backfire.</p>
<p>colored is anything but white, smart one,</p>
<p>Sure - although colleges do want the diversity, the blacks will face harder time getting admitted however if the low-income white kid has achieved more. Collges take into account where you go to school and where you live to determine the kind of resources that were available to you.</p>
<p>the term is "people of color"</p>
<p>I think a first generation college rural poor student would win because s/he is a more compelling candidate. The rich student's adds another demention of racial diversity, that is not all American students of color are poor or lower middleclass.
Obviously, both students would need to be in the top 10% of class (for elite college admissions); have taken the most rigorous curriculum available in their school; a good dose of community service (or work for the poor student, assuming the teen's income helped support their family); Lower test scores (25% percentile) would probably be acceptable for the poor student. Black students score need to be within the 50% of class range. Both should have a particular passion they have pursued.
That is my humble opinion.</p>
<p>Look - I am in no way, shape, or form racist. Trying to be PC like that simply indicates that they need to be special - yes, WHITES screwed them, and they may be implicitly screwed now. Their skin color is a way to describe 'people of color' - MY skin color is a way to describe me. If I were in a group of 'people of color,' then people would call me the 'white' kid. Is there a difference? NO.</p>
<p>fhim,</p>
<p>I was clarifying how the term is used today as opposed to the older term colored used to describe African Americans before the mid 1960s and the term that is often used to describe people of mixed race in southern Africa. It has nothing to do with being PC, just prevents confusion. Yeah, we all have a skin tone discription, like it or not. Every human being on the planet has issues and life is not fair.</p>
<p>guess you are not up on current events as the new underrepresented minorities are males of all races. Remember earlier this year when the Dean of Admissions and FA at Kenyon wrote a public apology in the NY Times to all of the young women she rejected in order to admit lower performing men?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Young men from low-income families, which are disproportionately black and Hispanic, are the most underrepresented on campus, though in middle-income families too, more daughters than sons attend college. In recent years the gender gap has been widening, especially among low-income whites and Hispanics. </p>
<p>When it comes to earning bachelor's degrees, the gender gap is smaller than the gap between whites and blacks or Hispanics, federal data shows.</p>
<p>All of this has helped set off intense debate over whether these trends show a worrisome achievement gap between men and women or whether the concern should instead be directed toward the educational difficulties of poor boys, black, white or Hispanic.</p>
<p>"Over all, the differences between blacks and whites, rich and poor, dwarf the differences between men and women within any particular group," says Jacqueline King, a researcher for the American Council on Education's Center for Policy Analysis and the author of the forthcoming report.</p>
<p>Robert Massa, vice president for enrollment, began campaigning for more male students shortly after he arrived at Dickinson in 1999 and discovered that only 36 percent of the incoming freshmen were male and that the college had accepted 73 percent of the women who applied, but only 53 percent of the men.</p>
<p>"The secret of getting some gender balance is that once men apply, you've got to admit them," Mr. Massa said. "So did we bend a little bit? Yeah, at the margin, we did, but not to the point that we would admit guys who couldn't do the work."</p>
<p>In education circles, Mr. Massa is sometimes accused of practicing unfair affirmative action for boys. He has a presentation called "What's Wrong With You Guys?" in which he says that Dickinson does not accept a greater proportion of male than female applicants, and that women still get more financial aid.</p>
<p>"Is this affirmative action?" Mr. Massa said. "Not in the legal sense." He says that admissions to a liberal arts college is more art than science, a matter of crafting a class with diverse strengths. </p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>sybbie719 - Personally, I think colleges should discriminate against men more in the college admissions process. True: the ratio is 11 women to 9 men on the average campus. In fact, I did an expository at a speech tournament about this. Regardless, I would prefer this ratio to be more like 1 man to 10 women. It seems like a much more favorable situation for me.</p>
<p>One problem that occurred to me with AA is at need blind colleges. How will such a college know the socio-economic status of a minority when they know nothing of his/her parents' financial background? Is there anything specifically on the admissions form that can accurately designate that?</p>
<p>If not, the question becomes: how can such a college reliably differentiate between, as in this example, the Beverly Hills Black student vs. a white student who came from the slums if not merely by race?</p>
<p>I suppose either student could write about their past troubles as part of their essay, but does the adcom actually have a way to verify the validity of that before the acceptance letter is sent?</p>
<p>Ideally I think AA would give people a chance they wouldn't have had otherwise (to whoever asked that). </p>
<p>Anyway...</p>
<p>In that scenario, I think some colleges would favor the wealthy black kid because he would help make up a percentage, be a positive model of his culture (most likely), possibly have higher grades (since he'd have had a better education at the private school), and would require less aid. </p>
<p>However, some colleges also like Regional diversity, so the poor kid from Tennessee could have a leg up on the rich kid. I mean, it seems to me (all racial issues aside) that a poor kid with few opportunities that did as well as a rich kid with infinite opportunities would end up being the more attractive candidate. </p>
<p>I really don't think there's an easy answer to this scenario.</p>
<p>AA is a great program, if it is based on income.</p>
<p>While the system likes to brag about AA, it doesn't help as much as it should. Unfortunatly, to help the student who despratly need it, they University has to pay for them to come. AA based on race fulfills both the public image and the pocketbook. And even if it was based on income, minorities are on average poorer than whites, so more minorities would benefit from whites.</p>
<p>Thats why need-blind admissions is such a good thing. If you get in, you can go, no matter how poor you are.</p>
<p>I think the white kid should go get a tan and then write he is AA on his application. Then he would probably have an advantage over the rich kid.</p>