<p>Morsmordre,
My conclusion is not inane nor is it wrong. My God, I just posted a quote from a sitting Supreme court justice quoting her praise for both Princeton AND Yale for using SAT-race based admissions based policy. What more do I have to do?</p>
<p>You justify AA by saying that allowing different SAT thresholds for different groups isn’t AA? That is inane. You say:</p>
<p>“The bar is much more important. If that threshold were 1000, and all the URMs who had over a 1000 got in as well as all the Whites then there’s no discrimination. If all the URMs who had under a 1000 were out and all the Whites who had under a 1000 were out, even better”</p>
<p>You go on to say:
“Now in the extreme example, imagine if all the URMs who got in had a 1001 and all the Whites had a 1600. It may look like discrimination, but it really isn’t. Florida is following the rules and within the law.”</p>
<p>You serious? You’re saying that you should cap the number of whites scoring 1600 to make room for URM’s with a 1001. You just defined affirmetive action. WOW! A race blind admissions school would fill up the slots on a combination of grades/SAT score (Oversimplified, I admit) from TOP to Bottom. The “box” for race wouldn’t even be part of the application.</p>
<p>Did you EVEN look at the data I presented? Based on your argument, I must say that if you did read the data, you didn’t really digest it. I think you’ve been so indoctrinated with AA being “just” that any justification will do. My god, actually READ the data before you spout off will you? I guarentee that anyone with a 1400 SAT who was rejected by US will know exactly what I mean.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You really didn’t read what I said did you? The bar is 1000 for everyone. Everyone gets in who has over a 1000. Becuase Whites have higher SAT scores when they get over a 1000 chances are they score more over a 1000 than Blacks. But the threshold is the same for everyone, regardless of their ethnic status. I read the data and that’s what I surmised. There’s a bar, and when most URMs pass it they don’t pass it by too much, which is to be expected because lots of URMs in the country don’t score significantly over that bar, and even less of those that greatly clear that bar apply to Florida. If you don’t like the idea of a bar for admission tell that UF. But UF, like most public schools, will give admission to most people who meet several academic criteria. That’s why you can’t compare it to an Ivy. If you can’t understand this, I have nothing else to say to you.</p>
<p>This thread is about UF practicing AA not Yale and Princeton. I don’t care what Sotomayor says about her alma maters, you are trying to show that UF practice AA, which you cant, because it doesn’t.</p>
<p>someones getting angry…</p>
<p>
If you admit someone with lower test scores – whether under AA or not – and that person subsequently graduates at the top of the class, then most people will not perceive any problem or injustice.</p>
<p>Granted, not everyone admitted under AA graduates at the top of the class. But in this particular case, Sotomayer did. </p>
<p>
You just said that test scores and college performance are “mutually exclusive”.</p>
<p>So how can anyone “earn a slot” based on test scores, which – according to your own statement – are of limited relevance to college performance anyway ?</p>
<p>This is going nowhere. Go ask Florida if they fill their class from top to bottom or if they generally admit kids above a certain combination of GPA and SAT. If they do the latter I bet you a million dollars URMs will still have lower test scores even if they didn’t check the race box. If you don’t like that go b!tch to UF admissions office.</p>
<p>By the way, I never claomed that Florida is an IVY. The Ivy League is a football conference. I do believe it is just as good or better than all of the big 10 schools (save for Mich and N-W’ern) and is much closer to Virginia and UCLA’s of the world than it is given credit for.</p>
<p>“If you admit someone with lower test scores – whether under AA or not – and that person subsequently graduates at the top of the class, then most people will not perceive any problem or injustice.”</p>
<p>The people being passed over who desearve admission based on merits find it unjust. Also there is a little clause in the Constitution called the equal protection clause that should prevent this.</p>
<p>You just said that test scores and college performance are “mutually exclusive”.</p>
<p>So how can anyone “earn a slot” based on test scores, which – according to your own statement – are of little relevance to college performance anyway ? </p>
<p>They are mutually exclusive, no doubt a person with a 1200 SAt can clean up at Harvard. But a college has the right to set a test score bar at whatever they feel. Applying that standard different to race groups is wrong.</p>
<p>I thought you were just presenting data, OP?</p>
<p>“This thread is about UF practicing AA not Yale and Princeton. I don’t care what Sotomayor says about her alma maters, you are trying to show that UF practice AA, which you cant, because it doesn’t”</p>
<p>I’m sorry you can’t interprate the data correctly. Why don’t you try taking the data to a Stats prof there at Stanford and ask him or her based on the data only, if there is discrimination. Maybe they will be able to put personal bias aside and see the facts for what they are. Spin all you want, rejecting someone from one group to accept someone of another group with lower numbers is discrimination. This is ESPECIALLY true at a public university, which, as you describe is more “numbers based” . Setting an artifically low bar in order to justify this is just a way to find a grey area in the law, in order to continus the practice.</p>
<p>You can attack me all you want, but it is just a defense mechanism because I’m challenging your engrained views of the world. Isn’t that what college is supposed to be about.</p>
<p>I am going to forward this thread to the UF president as well as the admissions committ. If I had a bully pulpit, it would go farther.</p>
<p>I was presenting data only a year ago :)</p>
<p>^^^
Did you say that UF is better than the Big Ten schools excluding NW and UMich?</p>
<p>LOL any body who knows anything about stats will agree with me on this one that you can’t conclude AA is occuring. I never once said I agree with race based AA I’m saying you cannot prove that it is occuring. Maybe you can understand this, if UF tomorrow said everyone with above a 600/2400 on the SAT will get in and everyone applied, guess which race would have the lowest SAT scores? Blacks. That was easy, wasn’t it? That’s because everyone would apply and Blacks have the lowest SAT scores out of all the ethnicities. But no one was rejected in favor of anyone else. Let’s say they said 1000/2400. Blacks again. Still with me? 1800/2400. Blacks again. Why, although all the people accepted scored over an 1800 not many Blacks score much higher than an 1800. But lots of whites and Asians do. No one is getting rejected to let someone in with lower scores. Go through the decisions threads on UF’s forum and find me a case where anyone gets rejected with over a 1400/1600 good grades and in state status. The only way you can possibly prove AA is if you show that someone is being rejected because of their race. Prove it to me.</p>
<p>"Florida is not any ivy league school as much as you may want it to be. Florida, like most public schools, operates mainly on a stat based admissions process. If you have SAT scores and grades above a certain threshold you’re in. If not you’re out. "</p>
<p>ABSOLUTELY WRONG- Florida = “holistic admissions” Here are some interesting links, the first of which is an article from "inside higher ED, titled "Is ‘Holistic’ Admissions a Cover for Helping Black Applicants?
September 2, 2008 " </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-florida/587890-proof-holistic-admissions-garbage.html?highlight=yale[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-florida/587890-proof-holistic-admissions-garbage.html?highlight=yale</a>
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-florida/682724-accepted-ivy-not-uf.html?highlight=yale[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-florida/682724-accepted-ivy-not-uf.html?highlight=yale</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-florida/653162-1300-higher-but-rejected-thread.html?highlight=yale[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-florida/653162-1300-higher-but-rejected-thread.html?highlight=yale</a></p>
<p>Finally, right from the source- ~12.5% of stidents with a 2100+ (~1400/1600) are flat out rejected.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.admissions.ufl.edu/ugrad/frprofile.html[/url]”>http://www.admissions.ufl.edu/ugrad/frprofile.html</a></p>
<p>So, disagree all you want, but don’t act like my interpretation is cerazy, fringe or invalid. There are some really smart people with tennible arguments on BOTH sides of this fence. I was looking for good, fact based debate, but mostly I got personal attacks.</p>
<p>
In that case, don’t forget the UF athletics department. Have you checked the SAT scores of recruited athletes yet?</p>
<p>“Go through the decisions threads on UF’s forum and find me a case where anyone gets rejected with over a 1400/1600 good grades and in state status. The only way you can possibly prove AA is if you show that someone is being rejected because of their race. Prove it to me”</p>
<p>I just did 
(again) Thank you for participating!</p>
<p>“In that case, don’t forget the UF athletics department. Have you checked the SAT scores of recruited athletes yet?”</p>
<p>Agreed 100%. I think that athaletes should be HIRED as employees and given tuition waivers and a good salary as part of a compensation package. Their value added to the school can actually be calculated by finance guru’s in the same was as an amployees can. So, yes, you’re right.</p>
<p>“Agreed 100%. I think that athaletes should be HIRED as employees and given tuition waivers and a good salary as part of a compensation package. Their value added to the school can actually be calculated by finance guru’s in the same was as an amployees can. So, yes, you’re right.”</p>
<p>Isn’t it currently illegal to do that?</p>
<p>This is certainly eye-opening, yet not entirely unexpected.</p>
<p>jotajota218 ,
no I said “just as good as or better than”</p>