Should Affirmative Action Consider Social Class?

Applying to College
121

<p>

</p>

<p>there have been flaws in the study</p>

<p>The Princeton paper is based on a previous study by Espenshade, Chung, and Walling </p>

<p>'‘Admission Preferences for Minority Students, Athletes, and Legacies at Elite Universities.’’ Social Science Quarterly 85(5):1422–46, 2004.</p>

<p>Objective. This study examines how preferences for different types of applicants exercised by admission offices at elite universities influence the number and composition of admitted students. Methods. Logistic regression analysis is used to link information on the admission decision for 124,374 applications to applicants’ SAT scores, race, athletic ability, and legacy status, among other variables. Results. </p>

<p>Elite universities give added weight in admission decisions to applicants who have SAT scores above 1500, are African American, or are recruited athletes. A smaller, but still important, preference is shown to Hispanic students and to children of alumni. The athlete admission “advantage” has been growing, while the underrepresented minority advantage has declined.</p>

<p>Conclusions.** Elite colleges and universities extend preferences to many types of students, yet affirmative action-the only preference given to underrepresented minority applicants-is the one surrounded by the most controversy.**</p>

<p>Models 5 and 6 add athlete and legacy status, respectively, to Model 4. Being a recruited athlete significantly improves one’s chances of being admitted to an elite university. The odds of acceptance for athletes are four times as large as those for nonathletes. Put differently, the athletic advantage is roughly comparable to having SAT scores in the 1400s instead of the 1200s. Legacy applicants also receive preferential treatment in admissions. Children or other close relatives of alumni have nearly three times the likelihood of being accepted as nonlegacies. The SAT effect is somewhat “steeper” when athlete status is controlled, but it changes little when legacy status is added. These results are partly explained by the fact that athletes in the applicant pools have lower average SAT scores than nonathletes (1298 vs. 1335), whereas there is a smaller gap between legacies (1350) and nonlegacies (1332).</p>

<p>Espenshade, Chung, and Walling conclude their article by stating:</p>

<p>The relative weights assigned to different student abilities are in constant motion, and our data indicate that admission officers at elite universities are placing a declining weight on belonging to an underrepresented minority student group, whereas the admission advantage accruing to athletes has been growing. By 1997, in fact, being a recruited athlete mattered more than any other type of admission preference we have examined. A subsequent article in this journal will consider the opportunity cost of admission preferences (Espenshade and Chung, forthcoming). Who are the winners and losers from current admission practices?</p>

<p>Examining preferences for recruited athletes and children of alumni in the context of admission bonuses for underrepresented minority applicants helps to situate affirmative action in a broader perspective. Many different student characteristics are valued by admission officers and receive extra weight in highly competitive admissions. It is all part of a process that views academically selective colleges and universities as picking and choosing from many different pools or queues in order to create a first-year class that best advances institutional values and objectives.</p>

122

<p>Haha pulling the “I taught graduate courses at JHU” card</p>

<p>Here’s another article: [At</a> Magnet School, An Asian Plurality - washingtonpost.com](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/06/AR2008070602343.html?hpid=topnews]At”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/06/AR2008070602343.html?hpid=topnews)</p>

<p>Seriously just because quotas are supposedly outlaws doesn’t mean that they are inherent within the system. Why is it that colleges admit minoritys at about the same rate year round? Just because it’s not formal or anything doesn’t mean it’s not ingrained within the system of AA. Besides I think it’s a good thing. </p>

<p>Try and look at the big picture sometimes and stop conforming to what people tell you…</p>

123

<p>The biggest flaw with the study overall is that it speaks to colleges would prefer to have and not what is actually happening in admissions at these schools (and there is a big difference between the 2). </p>

<p>While I would prefer to be independently wealthy, the reality is that I am going to get up in the morning and go to work becasue I don’t want to live on the street.</p>

<p>Most elite schools (the Ivies, AWS) don’t give athlethic scholarships. Although these schools have a “preference” toward admitting this type of student, there is nothing in the study that indicates that this actually happens. </p>

<p>An African American student who is a recruited athlete and has SAT scores over 1400 although 'preferred by elite schools " will in actuality have many options including and being more likely to to accept a full ride at a school that would give athletic/academic scholarships in a school that would definitely give them more exposure in their sport (ex: Duke/ Stanford) than to pay attend an Ivy because they do not give either athletic or merit money.</p>

124

<p>@ aspasp</p>

<p>I don’t think that using the term “dark-skins” is inherently racist, nor was is used in such a way in the context of the passage. It is an odd term, but is no different from saying “people of color”, which is somehow more PC. It’s just a statement of fact, like saying that I am a “light-skin” or “tan-skin”.</p>

<p>@ 2kidsincollege</p>

<p>There are not enough students with perfect SAT scores to have “thousands” turned away by “top” (<20% acceptance, if that even qualifies a school as “top”) schools, even if each student receiving these scores applied to every “top school”. If you are referring to students with an 800 in one or two sections, but not all three, your statement may be true, but as it is, less than 1% of applicants have perfect scores.</p>

125

<p>2kidsincollege,
I support AA practice 100%. I think society as a whole must protect every citizen and provide the best environment to nurture equality.
I don’t care about legacy and sport stuff at the private universities. It’s their monies!
But when I read kids (regardless skin color) who are trying hard, having stellar stats, not getting into best schools, I feel these talents are wasted !!! I’m just questioning the AA practice as a whole, with no implication that it should be stopped</p>

126

<p>One of the other things I have a problem wrapping my mind around is people decrying the same AA system that has given their parents/families a leg up. If schools would spend perhaps more than 2 weeks on the civil rights movements and the changes that took place, we tend to forget about the flight of immigrants to the UC and the CUNY system in the late 60’s and early 70’s (becauseboth public university systems were free).</p>

<p>You also decry the same group of people who marched, were beaten, lynched, had hoses turned on them, houses burned down so the doors of equal opportunity could be open to everyone.</p>

<p>What most students do not realize when it comes to college admission is that there are no minimum thresholds and theoretically any one who scores a 1800 is probably capable of doing the work at an elite school. They also know that it is not of any benefit to the college to admit a student who would not be successful there. No admissions committee has every said, that we are going to take the students with the highest scores, or the students with the most APs is going to “win.”</p>

<p>Elite college admission is not now nor has it ever been a complete meritocracy.</p>

127

<p>I don’t think that 1800 is enough to do the work at an elite school. It may be enough to do the work in college in general, but I think that elite schools require students scoring at least the high 1900s into the low 2000s.</p>

128

<p>I have had plenty of students over the years who got into elite schools with 1800/2000 of all races who have attended elite schools and have all graduated (some with honors). I have also had students who have scored over 2000, who have failed out of school or were placed on academic probation by the end of their first year.</p>

<p>Admissions committes do not solely look at SAT scores. This is the reason why transcripts are also used in the equation for college admissions. Remember that your transcript is representative of 4 years of work, which is why having stellar SAT scores will not compensate for a mediocre gpa.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It only just makes one who speaks about others in this manner really culturally encapsulated.</p>

129

<p>sybbie719
1800 and 2380 is an easy symbol to refer. I think CC people who’ve been here long, know SAT is never be a sole factor to determine for college acceptance</p>

130

<p>

</p>

<p>Exactly what flaws do you claim exist in the study? </p>

<p>Your quotations don’t indicate any problem, and only appear to be playing off the first paper against the second as to whether the effect of being black (230 SAT points, in their model) is larger than the effect of being an athlete (200 SAT points). The SAT-point comparison is the correct one, as it indicates the effect in their regression model of being in that category all other factors being equal. The higher admissions rate of athletes, such as recruited runners and golfers and private-school lacrosse players, is not as informative (whether higher or lower than that of black applicants) because many of the non-URM athletes will have strong SAT and academic credentials compared to the pool of URM applicants. The SAT-point comparison equalizes for all this, across the whole data set.</p>

131

<p>Point taken on the 1800 kids succeeding. I would imagine, however, that these kids would be the exception in that score range instead of the rule.</p>

<p>I also agree that GPA is as important, if not more important than SAT scores. All SAT scores measure is abiliity, not work ethic. That’s why the kid with an 1800 can succeed where the 2000 fails.</p>

<p>On the racial comment: Are you saying that the person making such a comment is condensing the whole of the subjects of such terms to their race (which I would agree that such terms do)? I wasn’t saying that using terms like “dark-skins” was good, just that it wasn’t mean or racist.</p>

132

<p>“Dark skins” was an aggregate term used to describe the Indian subcontinent, Hispanic and black kids who tear up classes and never get kicked out. D has seen such consistency in school policy of who gets expelled and who does not that the definition seems to come from the school, not the observer. It is not racist, it is just observation of school policy backed by data. Result: a generation of resentful white kids who know that they are held to a different standard. And that perpetuates racism, which makes me sad. Perhaps AA has had its day, and true equality is equality of policy and treatment.</p>

133

<p>Thank you for clarifying toadstool.</p>

134

<p>We had 8 kids accepted at HYP this year from our small public school and ALL of them, except for 1 (top student in the class) was a recruited athlete. This happens year after year. The legacies that get accepted all have high grades and scores, but not the athletes. </p>

<p>We have one student with a 3.5 GPA going to a top Ivy as a recruited athlete in a sport no one ever watches. This is not a money making thing for the school so it is hard to understand why.</p>

<p>I think the Ivies and other top schools should have athletic scholarships - then they can recruit a small number of athletes. Instead, schools have to recruit huge numbers of athletes because no athlete has to play. Some schools, like reportedly Williams, take up to a third of the incoming class as recruited athletes.</p>

135

<p>Nice article. :)</p>

136

<p>haha imagine lebron james kid getting in with aa.</p>

137

<p>Should Lebron James’ children grow up and not have their father’s athletic prowess, they would most likely be admitted as children of celebrity/developmental admits ;)</p>

138

<p>

</p>

<p>HAHAHAHAHA!</p>

<p>This is my support for Affirmative action. This is also my refute to the idea that affirmative action is what made this posters daughter “resentful” of black and hispanic people.</p>

139

<p>Gah I hate affirmative action. Just because I’m asian and I like math/science, and I’m not particularly good at writing essays, I’m going to be rejected from HYPS. ■■■.</p>

140

<p>“Result: a generation of resentful white kids who know that they are held to a different standard. And that perpetuates racism, which makes me sad. Perhaps AA has had its day, and true equality is equality of policy and treatment.”</p>

<p>If kids turn racist because of this, there’s some effin’ problems with them. Kids get racist because of AA? Seriously?</p>