<p>“OP, you do realize that the SAT is incredably biased against African Americans as a group, right?”</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>What?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><facepalm></facepalm></p>
<p>The amount of ignorance in this topic is intolerable. Obviously you don’t know that Indian and Chinese universities have far more rigorous and explicit AA programs. Indian universities like IITs specifically reserve 20-25% of freshman class seats for SC and STs. Chinese schools automatically give minority students a large score bonus on their entrance examinations.</p>
<p>And I like how you imply that it’s undesirable for Han ethnicity in China to dominate top positions… the Han are 92% of the country’s population. Domination by the Han is pretty much guaranteed by statistics, unless you’d prefer China reduce the Han presence down to less than 50%…</p>
<p>Stop talking about **** you know nothing about. Same goes for you, nicsagenius.</p>
<p>this thread is a win.</p>
<p>Obstinate, just shut up. You probably are a minority or wont go to a competive school that AA even affects.</p>
<p>LOL sarahdisk…</p>
<p>the SAT is not biased against anyone. I went to a high school that is over 90% black and have gone to such schools my entire life ( i am asian though) my school is one of the worst in Maryland and I still attained a competitive score on the SAT’s so did my friend who will be attending Princeton. This crap about how the test is biased is soo stupid! I dont know how! It all has to do with the student and his or her priorities! So get real guys the test inanimate, it doesnt discriminate, now if hords of students at a school dont do well on it maybe they should have gone the extra mile and tried to study! SAT prep books are free to check out the library! if they really cared about their future they could go the counselor who would be more than please to educate them about the test. I know because I did it! This isnt a black probelm this is a teenage problem!</p>
<p>“the SAT is not biased against anyone.”</p>
<p>You’re wrong in that kids of a lower socioeconomic status will not have the resources for tutoring/the time for studying.</p>
<p>But is it biased against any RACE? No.</p>
<p>100% truth to what Ray192 says.</p>
<p>^^^ im pretty sure every school offers EXTREMELY low cost sat classes if anyone wants one and even bigger discounts in a poor school district. </p>
<p>Yes, eventually the poor kid cant afford 10 ap books, sat books, etc.</p>
<p>I haven’t read any of the banter since the first page, but there are some things to consider. </p>
<p>First, a school will not admit someone that is can not handle the work and difficulty. Plain and simple. I read an article about UChicago the other day, and they stated that about 80% of their applicants are academically qualified, and this includes all the minorities and legacies they end up admitting. </p>
<p>Second, apparently research has shown that minorities, when given a chance to succeed, end up doing fabolous things later in life (this was also reference in the UChicago article- their admissions office strongly believes in giving students a chance)</p>
<p>Third, white/asian males perform better on the SAT than other groups, despite other things like GPA being equal (and there are studies that support this). Is the SAT specifically catered to these students? No, but it is the way the test works out. Please consider that, OP.</p>
<p>Fourth, some schools (UChicago, for one) when deciding between the last hundred people to waitlist/accept, will accept the students with the lower stats that will bring something to the campus (whether it is a community service junkie, a minority, an athlete, whatever) that the persons with the higher stats will not bring. So, this may explain why you (OP) were waitlisted and your peer got accepted.</p>
<p>The SAT was significantly biased in the past, back when they had analogies. There are numerous cases of analogies based on areas of knowledge almost exclusively available to upper class whites (which were probably in the majority of the people making the test, so its an understandable error). BUT since the analogies have been eliminated the test has become much more culture fair, as one doesn’t need any prior knowledge to answer context questions or those based on a reading passage. In addition, you’ll notice if you’ve taken the test a few times that the test makers deliberately try to make the topics as diverse and/or non-cultural as possible. So the reason for the score difference between groups is not test bias.</p>
<p>And as for AA admits failing out, at selective schools this is not the norm, at all. The graduation rates at such institutions are astoundingly high, for one thing. A recent study was also conducted on the admissions at UMich law school, which uses affirmative action (I would link to it but it was printed in a book: Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell). There was a significant difference between the qualifications of URMs and non-URMs entering the school, but no difference in real world success or graduation rates. One of the points that the book makes is that IQ, SATs, and other quantitative measures of intelligence are like height in basketball: you need a certain height to succeed, and extra height helps a little, but after a certain point you can be successful. And these schools have standards, its not like you’ll get in with a 1500 just because you’re black.</p>
<p>“That’s the reason why adcoms sometimes forgive an African American student of any socioeconomic class for having a low SAT score.”</p>
<p>Please tell that to the African American girl at my school who just hosted a 20,000 cotillion party. She has been given every advantage, and is currently receiving a full ride scholarship with tuition money that she certainly doesn’t need. Of course, I should not be complaining either, considering that I am white and reside in the wealthiest county in my state.</p>
<p>In my opinion, affirmative action should be economic, not race based. To me, the white kid in the trailer living next to the black kid in the trailer has similar life hardships. Though I am inherently not thrilled with the process, I can understand why the kid who has braved everything and has slightly lower test scores than me gets in. However, it is a bit harder to swallow when the kid next to me who is wealthier gets into a school because of their race. </p>
<p>AA should be economically based, and the minorities who are poor should be helped. I have a bit of trouble helping those who can help themselves at the expense of poor non-minorities.</p>
<p>I also think the AA should consider finances and circumstance, but basing it completely off of finances would be problematic for a couple of reasons. The most major of these is that it is not in the college’s best interest to give a boost to applicants that require more aid, so its very unlikely. Making AA finance based would also end need-blind admissions for all colleges (though the economy might make this moot in a few years :/).</p>
<p>Just to be clear I am NOT in favor of doing away with AA completely and do not subscribe to the belief that “Blacks have been free citizens for forty years, what’s taking them so long?”</p>
<p>collegebound you are incorrect about the SAT class thing. Most of the schools in my area do not offer them (rural), and I think you underestimate how bad some inner-city schools are. They’re so focused on passing NCLB tests that they have very little time (and money) for servicing their college-bound youth. I hate that law with a passion. Don’t really know what you’re saying about the books.</p>
<p>I understand college bound and you are right, most schools have some sort of sat prep resource for children whether it be a discount or an in school class. My school has failed to meet AYP for the third year now and i think it qualifies as one of the worst schools in the county and yet it still has a sat prep course, and even if it didnt i know that my counselor was more than happy to tell me about free sessions being held in other parts of the county. so, wombatsoup, your school maybe an exception because a majority of schools, rural or urban, can provide student with some sort of help. it all depends on how badly the student wants it and how rigorously they look for it! Once again i think just do away with AA and let the best student have the seat. The MAIN reason for going to college is academics so why shouldnt the admissions process be about the same!??</p>
<p>But wombatsoup, surely a wealthy African-American under the same settings as a wealthy Asian should be able to seize the same opportunities?</p>
<p>If colleges want to have a mix of races, fine. But the argument that African-Americans face an uphill battle is moot. POOR PEOPLE face an uphill battle. An African-American that is rich does NOT face an uphill battle. So let’s come to terms that the real purpose of AA isn’t to help the disadvantaged; it’s to make colleges multicolored.</p>
<p>who gives a crap about color, honestly! since when has a college education become a hand out thing that is supposed to make people feel equal. it should be free of politics. schools should not be concerned about race or color or creed they should just worry about their academic standards! i mean its just soo wrong that colleges have to do this AA thing for such a superficial reason! its dumb!</p>
<p>I agree with wombatsoup’s point about incredibly poor school systems only teaching to pass state tests. Speaking from my own experiences, i went to a horrible ghetto school system in middle school before going to private school for high school and i was taught prealgebra up to the 8th grade. I didn’t even know how to solve a simple system of equations because that was not covered on the Terranova (NJ aptitude test). Only elementary mathematics was covered. Therefore, i would conclude that blacks who live in poorer areas will not get an education on par with a wealthy student which will make it even more difficult for the black to score high on tests like the SAT. the foundation just isn’t there and skills are not honed enough (skills that profoundly help on the SAT) in the poorer school systems. This is why it’s very impressive when a student from a notoriously bad school system scores well on the test, which may show initiative on the student’s part to take control of their education despite the lackluster education they are receiving.</p>
<p>I do agree that AA in its current form is wrong, and that a revised AA would be impractical simply because colleges aren’t necessarily money wells. If a college wants to practice AA, however, it’s their decision to make and even though I disagree with it they really do have every right to exercise it.</p>
<p>^I agree that it ought to be based more on finances than race, in this day and age. What I was saying is that it would not be easy to switch. I don’t agree that race is completely moot, but even so most of the problems for minorities are directly caused by poverty (and indirectly caused by other factors) so its a wash I suppose.</p>
<p>Agreed. 10 char</p>