Want diversity w/o Affirmative Action? Don't rely on the SAT

Parents Forum
301

<p>If 62% of Americans are unwilling to "make every possible effort to improve position of blacks and other minorities, even if means giving them preferential treatment", then I am all for it because I do not advocate making every effort possible, even "preferential treatment". It is possible, for example, to issue a blanket statement saying "we prefer blacks over whites, despite qualifications". That is preferential treatment and I am against it along with 43% of other blacks (a surprisingly large figure!).</p>

<p>But if we are interested in Affirmative Action programs that are sensitive to race, instead of totally abolishing race in some dumb "race-blind admissions process" as many here advocate, then I am against it, along with 70% of the rest of Americans.</p>

302

<p>I don't disapprove of Affirmative Action. I don't think Fabrizio does either, but then he can speak for himself. Do you claim mine/our support for Affrimative Action as support for your position in favor of racial preferences in admission? If you claim the 70 % number that is exactly what you are doing.</p>

303

<p>Drosselmeier,</p>

<p>
[quote]
If 62% of Americans are unwilling to "make every possible effort to improve position of blacks and other minorities, even if means giving them preferential treatment", then I am all for it because I do not advocate making every effort possible, even "preferential treatment".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really? I request clarification because I find this statement to be at odds with your consistent position that our nation is obligated to redress the centuries of sins committed against blacks.</p>

<p>You seem to suggest that on the one hand, the United States must “satisfy the claims” you believe blacks have against their country, but on the other hand, the United States is not allowed to use every effort possible, including preferential treatment. (Some things are not possible, and thus these are excluded from the list of efforts.)</p>

<p>Regarding post 302, like curious14, I approve of affirmative action depending on its definition. If it is a policy that ensures that no American is discriminated by treating all equally without regard to race, then I am fully in support of it. If I were polled, I would be in that 70% group. However, I would also be in that 62% group because I am against racial preferences. I am not unique in this matter as the Pew survey showed that half of the 70% group was against racial preferences.</p>

304

<p>
[quote]
Really? I request clarification because I find this statement to be at odds with your consistent position that our nation is obligated to redress the centuries of sins committed against blacks.

[/quote]
There is obviously no conflict here at all. The nation is indeed obligated to correct these wrongs, and if it does so by implementing "Affirmative Action programs to help blacks", it can eventually do so. I just happen not to be so self-deceived as to think there is such thing as programs designed to help blacks that are also race-blind. LOL.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You seem to suggest that on the one hand, the United States must “satisfy the claims” you believe blacks have against their country, but on the other hand, the United States is not allowed to use every effort possible, including preferential treatment. (Some things are not possible, and thus these are excluded from the list of efforts.)

[/quote]
I have never advocated preferential treatment such that race is the sole or even primary determinant in whether a person gains admission to a school, where blacks are simply preferred over whites because of their race. Indeed, I think race should only be one of many factors in determining admissions because I am not so willfully-deceived as to think that race does not matter in America.</p>

<p>I favor Affirmative Action programs as defined by current law in a holistic evaluation system where, in addition to being aware of a candidate's race, a school "gives substantial weight to diversity factors besides race.", where a school is free to accept "nonminority applicants with grades and test scores lower than underrepresented minority applicants (and other nonminority applicants) who are rejected.".</p>

<p>I favor race-aware admissions because race is a very important part of life in America, affecting nearly everything. In this system there is no "preferential treatment" in the sense that one race is legally favored above another (as has been in the past, particularly against blacks). Schools are now able to use race to judge the context of a student's accomplishments, since race is indeed significant. It could easily be, for example, that a school might decide it doesn't need anymore scholarly black running backs, since it only needs a few at most, and since they are quite common. On the other hand, when coming across an application of a gifted mathematician, the school may decide to give it a second look, and finding that the mathematician is black, and being aware of how relatively little support black mathematicians receive in America, regardless of income, due to our racial history, the school may see an astounding degree of potential that it wants to help develop. That potential may have not been quite as apparent had such an important thing as race been deliberately hidden from the committee. I think it is just dumb to hide something that is so obviously important.</p>

<p>The same sort of weight should be applied to class. A school may see a poor student, and being aware of the student's poverty determine the student has great potential that it wishes to help develop.</p>

<p>The same sort of weight can and should be applied to sex. Right now, white boys are getting a substantial boost in some schools because the numbers have shifted toward girls.</p>

<p>The same sort of weight can and should be applied to whites of a certain region. A white southerner gifted in history with a demonstrated interest and gift in African-American studies may get an extra boost over a similarly qualified black student because the school may perceive that the student's race and culture presented particular obstacles for him as he engaged in this particular e field. The school may see profound potential as it sees how the student negotiated those obstacles. Without knowing the student's race those obstacles would never be apparent, and the student's potential would go completely unnoticed by an admissions committee.</p>

<p>This is Affirmative Action that helps blacks, women, and other minorities, including class and regional minorities. It is practiced today as described by law. I support it, happily, along with 70% of other Americans. I do not support "Preferential Treatment" of any single race over another. If a black guy is not qualified, he should not be selected. But I want race included in the evaluation of his qualification because it is important.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Regarding post 302, like curious14, I approve of affirmative action depending on its definition. If it is a policy that ensures that no American is discriminated by treating all equally without regard to race, then I am fully in support of it. If I were polled, I would be in that 70% group.

[/quote]
You would not, since that 70% expressed a desire to help "blacks, women, and other minorities". Clearly, race has a role here in the programs these Americans claim to favor.</p>

<p>The issue concerns your use of the term 'discrimination'. If it is the case that a student is rejected just because he is white, then he is being discriminated against because of his race, and that is against the law. If a student is accepted just because he is black then a preference for his race exists - that is "preferential treatment".</p>

<p>But if a student's acomplishments are judged as desireable, and race is used as only one of several factors to judge the student's potential, then no racial preference exists and neither is there racial discrimination.</p>

<p>
[quote]
However, I would also be in that 62% group because I am against racial preferences.

[/quote]
Oh I am quite aware of just how much in love you are with MLK! Oh my, were the truth known, you'd have us believe you wrote the man's speeches, that you marched arm-in-arm wid da peeps, chasing that insipid color-blind fantasy of yours. Hehe. You're just making mess up to justify dishonor. I see right through it, and so does anyone here with even a thimbleful of brain cells.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I am not unique in this matter as the Pew survey showed that half of the 70% group was against racial preferences

[/quote]
But they are all for Affirmative Action programs "to help blacks...", and so am I.</p>

305

<p>There is no conflict between an affirmative action program designed to encourge minorites to apply and a racially blind admissons process that evaluates those applications without regard to race.</p>

306

<p>"On the other hand, when coming across an application of a gifted [black] mathematician, the school may decide to give it a second look,"</p>

<p>^^ just as when an Ivy comes across an application of a gifted Asian writer, the school may decide [and often does] to give it a second look. And it does so when that writer's scores are lower than those of Asian math students and lower than scores of some URM applicants. (= preferential treatment)</p>

<p>"I favor race-aware admissions because race is a very important part of life in America, affecting nearly everything."</p>

<p>^^ = one of the major points of the all-black panel at the Harlem Book Fair that was broadcast on CSpan2.</p>

<p>Now, please don't tell us, fabrizio, that MLK did NOT believe that race is a very important part of life in America, affecting nearly everything. His goal of SURpassing racial considerations is not the same as asserting that he wanted to BYpass racial considerations, or that he thought that was realistic/possible in 1967 or even in the foreseeable future. ("I have a <em>dream</em>, not I see <em>reality.</em>" )</p>

<p>"The same sort of weight should be applied to class." (And it is.)<br>
One of the myths about current AA is that it trumps every other feature of any application. Not only is it possible for a poor Asian or poor white to get accepted and a middle-class black or latino not to be accepted in the same round, it actually happens, and is documented. (= preferential treatment)</p>

<p>You are preferred according to how you add to the mix of opportunity and the mix of contribution and the mix of accomplishment and the mix of origin (not just racial or national origin). You are preferred over someone who contributes at that moment of examination, less to the mix given what else is being offered. That's the "formula."</p>

307

<p>Epiphany,</p>

<p>"One of the myths about current AA is that it trumps every other feature of any application."</p>

<p>Gee, if this were true Harvard would be all Black and Hispanic. This is such a grotesque oversimplification of your opponent’s arguments that it is laughable. Race is exactly as important in the process as it has to be to allow the student body to have the "right" number of URM's represented. This is an informal quota system and everyone who does not have their eyes covered knows it.</p>

308

<p>curious, there may be more of an informal quota system at Harvard than there is at some Ivies. I do know that race does not tower over every other element at Columbia, at Princeton, at Brown, at Penn, at Yale, and perhaps should have limited my comments to those schools.</p>

309

<p>"I do know that race does not tower over every other element at Columbia, at Princeton, at Brown, at Penn, at Yale,"</p>

<p>How do you know that?</p>

310

<p>Holding on to a victim mentality (for lack of a better word) is a self-fulfilling prophesy, imo. When black people say things like "blacks have been on the defense ever since we were forced to these cursed shores" and refer to their very capable children as "my poor little black daughter", they give away the power. I cannot quickly find these statements, but I distinctly remember them because they struck me as sort of bitter and defeatist.

[quote]
But they are all for Affirmative Action programs "to help blacks...", and so am I.

[/quote]

If generations go on believing that they live in a cursed place, that their kids will be oppressed, and that they need help (with college admissions or employment or whatever), then they will.</p>

<p>My grandparents came here with no education and not even speaking English. Whenever anybody complained, somebody would always say to "work hard and pull yourself up by your bootstraps!" Consequently, we kids always felt that we were responsible for our own success or failure.</p>

311

<p>^^And your point? I don't see the big deal about AA. It only really affects a small number of students anyway. What really needs to be address is the low number of URM graduating from post-secondary institutions.</p>

312

<p>
[quote]
My grandparents came here with no education and not even speaking English. Whenever anybody complained, somebody would always say to "work hard and pull yourself up by your bootstraps! Consequently, we kids always felt that we were responsible for our own success or failure.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How impressive. Were your grandparents kidnapped from their native country, and sold as slaves in America, too?</p>

313

<p>Bay,</p>

<p>Were yours?</p>

314

<p>curious,</p>

<p>No. Were yours?</p>

315

<p>Bay,
No, they came on their own, like so many others. They saw these shores as a threshhold of opportunity rather than cursed. They were separated from each other, their lives were difficult and they encountered prejudice, but they endured. Some more recent generations made it through college, some are still laborers. Your life is what you make of it.</p>

<p>Oiram,
My point is one that held by some, rejected by others. If we tell/imply to our young black people that they need help and that everybody is against them, it is an impediment to their success. Embrace AA if you want, but the thing that is supposed to help you may very well be the thing that holds you back. Just food for thought.</p>

316

<p>Bay,</p>

<p>I'd be real surprised if anyone on this thread answered that question "yes".</p>

317

<p>lkf, self-help and AA are not mutually exclusive.</p>

318

<p>i was asked to clarify one of my posts, re: athletic recruitment and how this is another "bump" white students get in the admissions process. </p>

<p>when looking at athletic recruits across all divisions, there are FAR MORE white students being recruited. the NCAA information lfk presents is data on students who are participating in collegiate sports...these students are actively playing. there are plenty of students who are recruited to play in all divisions and are given "bumps" in the admissions process for this reason who don't play. however, this aside, only in football and basketball (and to a much lesser extent, track) do we see an over-representation of black students. i would not doubt that SOME of these students got athletic "bumps" in the admissions process, but let's dissect this further:</p>

<p>1) the only place where we really see black students being "over-represented" as varsity athletes in the ncaa (meaning there are more black students on a particular team than there are black students in the general population) is in football, basketball, and track - almost exclusively at the division 1 level (they aren't over-represented in division 3 football, for example). now, my assumption in making my comments in this forum is that we are talking about highly and most selective colleges and universities. as i have mentioned previously, VERY FEW COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES EVEN PRACTICE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN THEIR ADMISSIONS PROCESSES because so few schools are actually "highly" or "most" selective. remember, less than 50 schools out of the 4000+ institutions of higher education in this country admit less than 30% of their applicants. most colleges and universities are accepting 75%+ of their applicants or are open enrollment. SO, who is represented in division 1? mostly public colleges or universities that are not highly or most selective. other than, say ucla and berkeley (which have admit rates around 25%) and to a lesser extent uva, unc chapel hill, and william and mary (which are in the 30%+ range), there aren't going to be a lot of black students getting significant bumps for division 1 athletic talent as a) most d1 schools (which are publics) aren't selective and b) in order to play in the ncaa, minimum admissions standards have to be met, regardless of race. again, most of the division one schools are publics and not highly selective (and certainly not most selective). AND, considering that the UC system does not use affirmative action (they aren't allowed to by state law), the number of schools that are most selective publics in division 1 is close to 0. now, on the private side, the ivies are division 1, as are usc, stanford, duke, northwestern, rice, georgetown, and vanderbilt (admit rate around 33%). however, these schools represent a very small portion of division 1 schools. additionally, the recruit classes for football at ivies, for example, are still overwhelmingly white. if you don't believe me, go to their athletics websites and look at the rosters...you can actually see pictures of their players...at these schools, the proportion of students on the active rosters who are black is not near the average for division 1. these are also the schools that have squash, equestrian, fencing, crew, etc...almost exclusively "white" recruited sports. so while it may seem as though there is a significant over-representation of black students at the division one level - at least on football, basketball, and track teams - the reality is that there aren't many schools in this division (like in general) where affirmative action is actually used; additionally, those that are d1 and do practice affirmative action still do not have nearly the same number of black students playing these sports as do other d1 schools. </p>

<p>breaking it down further...</p>

<p>2) basketball teams usually bring in recruit classes of 5-10 students/per year. at a school like georgetown, for example, that represents 1.2% of the school's entering class, assuming 20 recruits (10 per team, male and female) were brought in in the freshman class of roughly 1590 students. even if georgetown brought in 32 basketball players (say 16 per team, male and female), this still only represents 2% of the incoming class. and we don't know if all of them would be black students. even on football teams, IF the recruit class is 50-60% black, this still is minute. if the average d1 school is bringing in 50 guys to play in the freshman class (which, based on my experience, is reasonable), that's 25-30 black students. to use my georgetown example, that would represent 1.5-1.9% of the incoming class (but georgetown's football team is not 50% black, nor did they bring in close to 50 recruits...i know one of them). </p>

<p>4) look at the numbers of black students playing at the varisty level in all sports at d3 schools - where our nation's top liberal arts colleges play. the numbers are staggeringly minute, whereas 80-85% of the students playing varsity sports at these schools (depending on the given year) are white. and with over 30 teams lisited, it is clear that atheltics "bumps" abound for white students here. </p>

<p>bottom line here: there are very, very, very few schools in the landscape of american higher education that actually practice affirmative action. those that do, however, are not represented nearly as much as schools that do not at the division 1 level, where we see large numbers of students on 3 teams being black. at schools that do practice affirmative action (namely the ivies, some other most selective privates, and the most selective liberal arts colleges), the number of black student varsity athletes is quite small when compared to their white peers. at these schools, athletics does provide a significant bump and they go primarily to white students.</p>

319

<p>

For sure, I agree with you there. Some people seem to lean heavily on the need for AA, though, and I think that passing on the neediness from generation to generation might be an impediment to success. Why assume the world is out to get you?</p>

320

<p>I, for one, would be delighted if preferences for recruited athletes (and legacies) disappeared. If the elimination of racial preferences in admissions created pressure for that to happen it would be a wonderful side benefit. (But that’s just me.) Perhaps Adofficer could answer a fact question for us. I understand that the magnitude of the "bump" or "tip" (preference) that recruited athletes receive varies a lot depending on the skill of the athlete and the importance of the sport to the school. Is there any data comparing SAT scores for recruited URM and non-URM athletes?</p>