URM Chances

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Pennsylvania
61

<p>What he said was that affirmative actions helps those who won't achieve higher than he will (and for the most part it's hard to argue that this isn't true). Again, you refuse to rebut the argument instead opting to pick certain irrelevant statements from his post and use them to infer racism. I understand the problem though...there are no logical arguments in defense of affirmative action (just paranoid cries of discrimination).</p>

62

<p>Yes, I wasn't implying that black neighborhoods were poor and destitute--momsdream was by saying "we live in a black neighborhood" blah blah where the other black kids hated the smart one, and in any case, it was just a sidepoint. </p>

<p>Of course there are blacks who can and will achieve much higher than I will, as there are Indians who will achieve much higher than you will. I'm just saying the blacks who don't and can't should not be treated specially in the admissions process simply because of their skin color. That's just like giving whites preference in the admissions process a percentage of them are rich, or asians preference because a percentage of them are extremely smart. It's entirely flawed.</p>

<p>And momsdreams whole idea of attempting to force the diversity and allow it to mirror society is likewise flawed. You just keep saying oh its to allow diversity blah blah--why is FORCING diversity so absolutely necessary that we should destroy the chances of many a smart asian and white to create it? I'd much rather have fairness and equality in the college admissions process.</p>

63

<p>AnuVX - </p>

<p>I'd rather have fairness and equality in America. However, we don't have that. So the people who dreamed up the Civil Rights acts - and it was the beloved John F Kennedy who came up with the idea - decided to begin taking "affirmative action" to ensure that blacks were given their fair share of society's wealth (government contracts, home loans, COLLEGE ADMISSIONS, etc)</p>

<p>I'm sure that you will agree that empirically, blacks make less money than whites, blacks have lower education levels than whites, blacks are more likely to go to jail, blacks are more likely to be born out of wedlock and live in a single parent househould, etc. etc. Much of this (not ALL, but MUCH) of this is due to the fact that blacks have never been given the fair, equitable shot at the "game of life" that whites have.</p>

<p>The purpose of affirmative action is to attempt to right this wrong, by making it easier for qualified black students to make it into colleges and universiites, get contracts from the government, etc etc. The operative word here is QUALIFIED. An ivy league school will not take a black applicant solely on the basis that they are BLACK - they are still required to be qualified to handle the workload and intellectual stimulation of the ivy league classroom. Affirmative action's "strength" in the admissions process, its effect on the decision of the admissions committee, I would argue, is no greater than that of "alumni offspring" status for a white student. And yet nobody complains about that set of preferences?</p>

<p>By giving these few, qualified black students a leg up in the admissions process, the colleges are attempting to create an "educated black elite," if you will, that is sadly nonexistent in the United States. A white elite have existed in this nation since its inception - the attendees of great schools like Penn and Harvard and Columbia (it was King's College before the Revolutionary War) - and their sons and daughters have reaped the benefits of their educations.</p>

<p>Blacks, until now, weren't afforded such opportunities. That's why affirmative action exists.</p>

64

<p>
[quote]

The purpose of affirmative action is to attempt to right this wrong, by making it easier for qualified black students to make it into colleges and universiites, get contracts from the government, etc etc. The operative word here is QUALIFIED.

[/quote]

If they're qualified then why do they need AA or a boost? It sounds like you're disillusioning yourself.

[quote]
Affirmative action's "strength" in the admissions process, its effect on the decision of the admissions committee, I would argue, is no greater than that of "alumni offspring" status for a white student. And yet nobody complains about that set of preferences?

[/quote]

Firstly, legacy affects all races equally. and again, it sounds like you're disillusioning yourself because I hear plenty of criticisms of legacy!
SECOND OF ALL, TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT. If people don't complain about legacy (which they do) that doesn't mean they have no right to complain about another perceived wrong.</p>

<p>And about your rest: Are you honestly justifying AA because of the fact that blacks weren't admitted to Columbia 300 years ago?</p>

65

<p>"If they're qualified then why do they need AA or a boost? It sounds like you're disillusioning yourself."</p>

<p>AA is needed because even though african- americans might be qualified, they are still discriminated against by society.</p>

<p>Yes, one of the reasons AA exists is because of the discrimination faced 300 years ago. That discrimination stamped african americans as a 2nd class citizen. That stamp has held strong throughout history and AA is one way to help fix that stamp.</p>

66

<p>That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, adj. Your logic just doesn't hold. Short people are more discriminated against by society. So are fat people. And people with no legs. And Jews. It sounds like your logic is inconsistant. Further, why do we need AA if those who benefit from it are just as qualified as those who don't? You're going to have to show me why being discriminated against warrents a boost (that's what 30 extra points to your score is ... a boost!) especially if, as you say, those who recieve AA help are just as qualified. If they are just as qualified, then obviously the discrimination hasn't been hurting them!</p>

<p>Further, why would a minority even apply to a school that would discriminate against them if it wasn't for government enforcement?</p>

67

<p>Under-represented minority populations at the top schools are still pretty low yet everyone is bothered by AA.</p>

<p>UPenn Class of 2008 - 2,468 Students
African-American -- 178 7%
Hispanic/Latino -- 161 7%
Biracial/other -- 9 <1%</p>

68

<p>Once again, I just don't see the bearing of that statistic when arguing demonstratively whether or not affirmative actions is a morally sanctioned action!</p>

69

<p>Very good posts Asalientone. I'm glad your forcing them to defend their positions.</p>

70

<p>Momsdream said, </p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Being "qualified" for a black DOES NOT MEAN EQUALLY QUALIFIED. Its all relative.</p>

<p>You can't have it both ways, that is to say, receive a racial preference for admission giving a black a HUGE tip in admissions, and say that he is equally qualified. Yes, he may be "qualified", but marginally qualified. That's what a racial prefrence is for URMs does. If he were EQUALLY QUALIFIED, there would be no need for RACIAL PREFERENCES, and race based AA, admitting preferred blacks with lower standards than the average for the rest of the non-preferred groups in the class.</p>

71

<p>Momsdream said:</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>In answer to your question, the following is what makes me angry about this system. Being "qualified" does not mean EQUALLY QUALIFIED. </p>

<p>Please click on:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/comment/kirsanow200311190903.asp%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/comment/kirsanow200311190903.asp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>November 19, 2003, 9:03 a.m.
Transparent Discrimination
"What is the termination date of your racial-preference policy?"</p>

<p>By Peter Kirsanow </p>

<p>Excerpts from the essay above:</p>

<p>[Students would greatly benefit from yet more transparency in the college-admissions process. That process contains elements that favor some applicants far more than mere legacy preferences. Legacy applicants are two to three times more likely to be admitted than their non-legacy comparatives. If Sen. Kennedy thinks that's unfair, he should be outraged by the fact that many colleges employ admissions criteria that favor some students over others by a factor of up to 200 to 1. Surely then, colleges should be required to report information about such criteria, the unfairness of which dwarfs that of legacy or early admissions.</p>

<p>Toward that end, there should be no objection to attaching to Sen. Kennedy's bill provisions mandating that colleges that receive federal aid provide answers to the following questions:</p>

<ol>
<li>Does your school discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity?</li>
</ol>

<p>Colleges needn't be shy about responding to this inquiry. After all, the Supreme Court allows elite colleges to discriminate on the basis of race. Since virtually every non-open enrollment school (and even some of those) uses racial preferences in admissions, no one school will stick out. And most colleges loudly proclaim their allegiance to diversity, so they should be eager to respond.</p>

<ol>
<li>If the answer to the above question is "yes," which races/ethnicities are preferred and which are not?</li>
</ol>

<p>Most studies show that schools employing racial-preference programs favor blacks and Hispanics over whites and Asians, but a comprehensive analysis has yet to be done.</p>

<ol>
<li>What is the median high school GPA/SAT of your school's applicant pool? (Please disaggregate by race/ethnicity.)</li>
</ol>

<p>This shouldn't be a burden. A scan of college guides shows that most schools already compile this information.</p>

<ol>
<li>What is the median GPA/SAT of admittees from non-preferred racial/ethnic groups? From preferred racial/ethnic groups? (Disaggregate by specific race and ethnicity.)</li>
</ol>

<p>Here is where college administrators will start to sweat. At many elite schools the median GPA differential between non-preferred and preferred admittees is nearly a full point; the median SAT differential can exceed 200 points. This is a serious legal problem because the Supreme Court only allows race/ethnicity to be used as a "plus" — a feather on the scale — in admissions. But in practice, the right race/ethnicity has the weight of an anvil. The data would almost certainly reveal that few if any schools are actually complying with Grutter. That means litigation.</p>

<p>Furthermore, the data collected from the answers to the above questions will assist in the calculation of an applicant's odds of admission to a particular school. Most schools already disclose the overall percentage of applicants who are admitted in any given year. Elite schools sometimes showcase these figures as proof of their exclusivity. However, these figures are incomplete and misleading. They fail to reveal that an applicant's chances of admission rise exponentially if he/she is a preferred minority. For example, thanks to the analysis of Robert Lerner and Althea Nagai at the Center for Equal Opportunity, we all know that the typical black applicant is 174 times more likely to be admitted to Michigan than his white counterpart. But at some schools (and at certain GPA/SAT levels) the odds for preferred minorities can be significantly greater than that.</p>

<p>As Sen. Kennedy noted, this type of information would allow students and families to make "informed, strategic application and enrollment decisions." An Asian student with a 3.5 GPA and 1300 SAT may decide not to waste an application fee on a school where his odds of admission are only one-tenth that of a preferred minority with a 2.5 GPA and an 1100 SAT.</p>

<ol>
<li>What are your school's five-year graduation rates? (Please provide this data broken down by race/ethnicity.)</li>
</ol>

<p>The graduation rates for preferred minorities are abysmal, frequently up to 20 percentage points below those of whites and Asians. There is also some limited data that suggest that the more heavily a school relies on racial preferences, the lower the school's graduation rate for preferred minorities. While this may be intuitively plain — the greater the preferences, the more likely a school would attract more under-qualified applicants unable to compete against non-preferred students — no comprehensive database exists to gauge the degree of the disparity.</p>

<p>Students and parents could use this information in making enrollment decisions. Why enroll at a school where the data suggests you only have a 35 percent probability of earning a degree, especially if you have to pay $20,000 in tuition for the privilege of flunking out? The publication of such information might also embarrass some schools into taking measures to improve their numbers.</p>

<p>Providing the above information is a small price to pay for the right to discriminate on the basis of race. But the Grutter rationale, taken to its logical conclusion, suggests colleges should provide even more information. The Grutter opinion refers to things such as critical mass, racially neutral alternatives, duration, and the educational benefits of diversity. </p>

<p>Accordingly, several more questions should be put to colleges:</p>

<p>Did your school consider race-neutral alternatives to your racially discriminatory policy? If so, which ones? Why were they rejected?</p>

<p>What are the educational benefits the school allegedly derives from a diverse student body? How did the school make that assessment? What's the evidence of these benefits?</p>

<p>What is your school's minority population? What is your school's critical mass of preferred minorities? How did you arrive at that figure? What data support your determination?</p>

<p>What is the termination date of your racial-preference policy?</p>

<p>Publication of the answers to these questions would have an interesting effect not just on the educational and public-policy establishments, but on the market as well. More information would allow consumers (students) to make more rational application and enrollment decisions. This in turn might require colleges to adjust their admissions policies in response.</p>

<p>Federal, state, and local governments require banks, insurers, manufacturers, contractors, and other employers to provide copious racial data. Colleges should provide the data also. But that would lead to much protest, embarrassment, and litigation — so don't expect to see this information any time soon.]</p>

<p>— Peter Kirsanow is a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.</p>

72

<p>ethioman said,</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Again, being "qualified" for a black admitted with race prefrences with lower standards through race based AA DOES NOT MEAN EQUALLY QUALIFIED. If this black was EQUALLY QUALIFIED, there would be no need for preferential treatment in admissions. Its all relative.</p>

<p>The "purpose" of race based AA in elite college admissions is not legally justified to "right this wrong" in the US Supreme Court, but to provide diversity for the class, whose benefits have yet to be proven. The Court never justified the use of race as a factor in college admissions to "right this wrong" of black slavery which was abolished over 150 years ago. The court never ok'd the use of one wrong to "right" another wrong. In fact, the swing vote, Justice Sanfra O'Connor, in the US SUPREME Court decision's 5 to 4 in favor of the use of race as a factor in the U.of Michigan Law School case, said it should only be used for another 25 years. Well it has been 40 years since the first use of AA, and it has solved nothing in closing the racial gaps in academic achievement, execpt for benefitting underperforming and underachieving midlde and upper class blacks, admitted with lower standards via race preferences and AA. Over 2/3 of these blacks are children of immigrants from the Carribean and Africa, and not the descendents of Americans slaves, the intended beneficiaries of AA. Why should UNDERPERFORMING AND UNDERACHIEVEING affluent blacks who are are not descendants of Afro-American slaves receive a HUGE tip in admissions based soley on the black color of their skins?? The decendants of Afro-American slaves were the ones who sufferred under Jim Crow, not the affluent black immigrants from Africa and the Carribean. They do not deserve race prefrences.</p>

73

<p>To Momsdream.</p>

<p>The relative quality of each applicant group is NOT THE SAME, according to all standards of admissions. Not all applicants groups are EQUALLY QUALIFIED. Blacks are the least qualified, yet they have the highest admit rates. Even if the blacks are EQUALLY QUALIFIED, which they are not as an applicant group, they should not have the highest rate of acceptance. But they are least qualified, as an applicant group, yet they have the highest rate of acceptance. By all accounts, the black applicant group should have the LOWEST acceptance rate. It's simple to understand.
Blacks have the highest acceptance rates, admitted with lowered standards, because of race-based AA, given preferential treatment admissions, tipping admissions the most in their favor.</p>

<p>Among ALL the factors used for admission or rejection, race is the biggest tipping factor</p>

74

<p>To Momsdream and ethioman:</p>

<p>Blacks admitted with the race preference and AA are NOT EQUALLY QUALIFIED. If they were, they would not need PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN ADMISSIONS and AA would be totally uneccessary.</p>

<p>You can't have it both ways. </p>

<p>Certainly, there are blacks who are admitted to the Ivies and other competitive colleges with EQUAL QUALIFICATIONS, without the benefit of race based Affirmative Action and preferential treatment. They are pitifully very few in number, because the black applicant group , by en large, lack the qualifications on an equal basis with the rest of the admitted class. According to the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (JBHE), if lower standards and qualifications were not used for blacks with race based AA, blacks would only be between 1% to 2% of the highly competitive colleges, instead of the 6% to 8% blacks that are there now who were admitted by lower standards and qualifications, enabling thousands upon thousands of addittional blacks to attend the elite, highly selective and more competitive colleges.</p>

<p>These underprepared, lower qualified blacks really belong in the lower tier colleges and there is nothing wrong with this, because there are 4000 other institutions of higher learning in America, giving plenty of opportunity for blacks, as well as anyone of any race, to obtain a higher education, because over 98% of Americans who received college degrees were educated in these other schools. Students should attend schools commensurate with their qualifications and preparedness according to the qualifications of the students in each school. Every other American does, so why not blacks? There is abundant opportunity for everyone to acheive a college education in America in the year 2004, especially for blacks. There are the community colleges, city and smaller state colleges and other private colleges which collectively represent the best higher educational system in the world.</p>

<p>"An Asian student with a 3.5 GPA and 1300 SAT may decide not to waste an application fee on a school where his odds of admission are only one-tenth that of a preferred minority (black) with a 2.5 GPA and an 1100 SAT." if these schools made their admissions process more transparent and let the truth be known, exposing the perversity of the process and how demented, unfair and immoral it is. These schools will never reveal their admissions data according to each admissions standard used and the criteria met by each student, DISAAGREGATED by race and ethnic group, because this will expose the adcoms hypocrisy, their double and triple standards in admissions, by using different standards of admission for different groups. Asian Americans are required to meet higher objective standards of achievement, such as SAT scores and GPAs, and a higher holistic criteria than any other group, including blacks, latinos and whites, in order to be admitted. The holistic criteria consists of charcacter, leadership, special talents, awards (Intel Finalists, International Math, Physics and Chemistry Olympiad Gold Medals, national literary and music awards, etc.)motivations, perseverance, and the overcoming of obstacles, such as economic disadvantage and cultural and language differences for Asian Americans, from being one of the smallest racial minorities in America.</p>

75

<p>This whole debate is moot. Some minority that games the system and gets in to a top school with SAT's 300 points lower than the norm, shady grades, etc., has a much lower chance of success in life than the jilted applicant with better credentials that is forced to get a superficially less impressive undergrad degree. The middle class or upper middle class minority kid that pimps the system will ultimately get their comeuppance and vice- versa. Also, high school academic performance probably has a low correlation with financial success or peace of mind. I know a dim witted high school dropout that is more successful in his mid- twenties than the ivy leaguers I know that are much older.</p>

76

<p>Get used to less qualified people winning unfairly for stupid arbitrary reasons. We live in such a meritocratic country that W. is prez. Also, get used to qualifications being subjective</p>

77

<p>ethioman00, if you are indeed ethiopian then you're ancestors did not suffer from slavery. Your great-grandmother might have lost a relative from slave-traders, but that is the extent of "your" suffering.</p>

<p>If your argument is indeed valid, then you should not be benefiting from affirmative action. After all, your ancestors were not oppressed in America therefore you never lacked a fair shot.</p>

<p>Hmm...</p>

78

<p>davidrune...</p>

<p>if you take a look at my stats, i dont NEED affirmative action</p>

<p>1550 SAT, 3.86 GPA, with 11 AP classes and 1500 hours of community service speak for themselves</p>

<p>that being said, being BLACK in america itself is suffering - you are expected to fail, harassed by the police, placed in "dumb-track" courses (unless of course you have parents whose zeal for education rivals that of the religious zeal of palestinian militants), treated like a criminal at any retail establishment you visit, and of course, subject to the arbitrary DWB. just because my parents came from Ethiopia doesn;t mean that I'm somehow exempt from the discrimination blacks experience daily, im still BLACK. </p>

<p>all im saying is that blacks who would benefit from it deserve to have it - and im going to defend their right to have it</p>

<p>by the way, none of my great-grandparents were ever slaves</p>

<p>if youll take a look at a map of africa, you will quickly realize that Ethiopia is on the far east side...slaves were taken from west africa buddy.</p>

79

<p>The statistics show, ethioman, that your perceptions of racism in America make you a minority amongst black people: </p>

<p><a href="http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder120700.asp%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder120700.asp&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/555860/posts%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/555860/posts&lt;/a> </p>

<p>And put it this way: You're most probably a lock for Penn. Congrats so much for working hard and doing well. You earned it, buddy. Are you going to feel pleased if some other person who didn't put in the same effort you also gets in, just because he has the same skin color as you?</p>

80

<p>i would feel MOST pleased</p>

<p>because you see, ASalientOne, i could care less what others think of my achievements-i don't care if they want to question whether or not I got where I was through affirmative action.</p>

<p>and hey? who's to say they didn't put in as much effort as I have into their educational careers?</p>

<p>im still achieving, and to me thats what counts.</p>

<p>btw ASalientOne, I'm not going to trust a statistic on the "perception of racism" by teens on a site devoted to spreading the gospel of Larry Elder...you're gonna have to do better than that</p>