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

<p>AdOfficer,</p>

<p>Thanks for your post.</p>

<p>Affirmative action was not originally a system of racial preference. Unfortunately, it has become just that. In the concurring opinion for Grutter, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor repeatedly used the word “preferences” without any indication that it was a misleading term.</p>

<p>In fact, Justice Lewis Powell stated in Bakke that “there are serious problems of justice connected with the idea of preference itself” (emphasis added).</p>

<p>If these Justices use the word “preference” when determining the constitutionality of affirmative action, then by golly - preference must have something to do with affirmative action.</p>

<p>Heck, you use the word “bump” (albeit in quotation marks) but eschew “preference.” If you so prefer, instead of calling it racial preferences, I can call it racial bumps.</p>

<p>
[quote]

simply put, setting the bar at one level and then expecting everyone to jump over it when there are impediments restricting how high each student can jump is not fair and not meritocratic.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Woah, woah, woah. Who expects “everyone” to be able to jump the bar?</p>

<p>Since there are over 4,000 universities in our nation, there are over 4,000 bars. I expect “everyone” to be able to find a bar that he can jump and then jump it.</p>

<p>There may be “impediments restricting how high [a] student can jump,” but I don’t buy for a second that he can’t jump at least one bar with his accomplishments.</p>

<p>After all, I recall you wrote that there are many great colleges in our country and that students should consider these great colleges instead of focusing exclusively on the “elites.” Don’t you think that these impeded students can jump at least one bar?</p>

<p>You say that “there are many under-represented students (both racially and economically) who are put at a disadvantage in the admissions process at many elite colleges…because their…schools have not been able to adequately prepare them for the rigors of an elite college.”</p>

<p>I ask, “Should they be at an elite college, then?”</p>

<p>Also, how do you explain that a high school diploma “used to mean something” but doesn’t now?</p>

<p>Lastly, your final paragraph ignores the research from Espenshade and Chung, which was not refuted by Kidder. E&C showed that whites aren’t helped much by the abolition of racial preferences, but Asians are helped immensely.</p>

<p>hmmm, well if we do "prefer" specific candidates for admissions based on race over others, that must mean we DO NOT "prefer" black/African American and Latino students as compared to white and asian american students in the admissions process at elite colleges. after all, black/African American and Latino students are grossly under-represented at most elite institutions when compared to their numbers in the american population. </p>

<p>curious14, does this logic make sense? based on your comments and some others', it should...</p>

<p>doubleplay...actually, white male students are getting quite a "bump" at most elite colleges and universities nowadays...they are applying in smaller and smaller numbers and, when compared to white women, they don't seem to be achieving as much. this could be due to demographic shifts, but there are more highly talented women flooding our applicant pools than there are men. this is a generalization, which i try to stay away from, but based on every conversation i have had with peers at other most selective schools, this has been the case. at many elites, women make up 60-65% of the applicant pools (and the majority are white), yet they hover only around 50% of the incoming classes (and again, the majority are white). men - of any race - are doing well in the admissions processes at the elites. </p>

<p>the dean at kenyon got a lot of drama for revealing this in a piece she contributed to the ny times not too long ago:
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html?ex=1300770000&en=3cbba681d5e99b06&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html?ex=1300770000&en=3cbba681d5e99b06&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>legacy applicants and recruited athletes can - at many schools (especially d3 liberal arts colleges and some ivies) - be much more than just "niche" portions of the incoming classes. in fact, many elites have more legacies and recruited athletes in their classes than they do black/African American or Latino students. in addition, their admit rates can be 3x's the admit rate than non-legacies, non-athletes, and black/African American and Latino students. princeton, for example, supplies this information online in their undergraduate viewbook for the incoming class in 2006: <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/pr/facts/profile/06/08.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.princeton.edu/pr/facts/profile/06/08.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>admit rate for alumni children: 39%<br>
percent of class: 14%
these students only represent 3% of their applicant pool</p>

<p>admit rate for minority students: 13%
percent of class: 37%
these students represent 36% of their applicant pool</p>

<p>on campus, 9% of students are African American; 7% are Latino/Hispanic; 13% are Asian American (these numbers are from petersons.com)</p>

<p>"hmmm, well if we do "prefer" specific candidates for admissions based on race over others, that must mean we DO NOT "prefer" black/African American and Latino students as compared to white and asian american students in the admissions process at elite colleges. after all, black/African American and Latino students are grossly under-represented at most elite institutions when compared to their numbers in the american population. </p>

<p>curious14, does this logic make sense? based on your comments and some others', it should..."</p>

<p>Nice job of illustrating what is meant by sophistry.</p>

<p>Do you deny that if you had two identical applications in front of you one with the Af. Amer. box checked, the other with the Casucasion box checked (and you could take only one) that you would pick the AA candidate 100 % of the time?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Sophistry aside, that is “preferring “ “Black and Hispanic” candidates to “White and Asian” candidates.

[/quote]
I do not think the sophistry was ever put aside here. Can anyone in America deny, sincerely now, that a greater premium is placed on white skin than on black? Come now. That premium has an enormous and negative effect in the lives of blacks. It is literally, not just practically, but literally</a> killing us. Now that is real racial preference, and it is everywhere—in every single place we turn. It is so prevalent and entrenched that few whites can see it despite being shown it plainly.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do these poverty-level whites and Asians have access to educational opportunities that the upper middle class blacks do not?

[/quote]
I think they do, though I also think the issue is more complex than mere access to a school across town. Poor whites and poor Asians aren’t generally living in the same communities as blacks, and they aren’t subjected to the same pressures</a> and stigmas that affect blacks of all income levels. Surely Asians face some of these things, but not to the extent blacks face them. Moreover, there are issues with culture that give whites a boost and that are decidedly harmful to blacks of all income levels. Poor white kids get to see White Jesus each Sunday, and they enjoy White Santa each Christmas, in newspapers, magazines, and on television nationwide. They get to read “great” literature wherein mere handfuls of noble whites throttle tens of thousands of dark-skinned human corruptions. They even get to see black kids made to read this “great” literature. They are raised in a culture where film after film shows mere handfuls of whites throttling apparent millions of dark-skinned humans. These are mere examples of the cultural advantages poor whites have over even the wealthiest blacks – and they are very powerful. They are additionally so ubiquitous everyone takes them for granted. Indeed, they are such established features of our culture most of us would have a hard time accepting anything else. I think poor Asian-Americans, by and large, are somewhat insulated from the ill-affects of this advantage because they are able to derive quite a lot of meaning from their own cultural myths, beliefs, and observances, many of which come directly from their ancestral homelands. But due to history, blacks are left in the very unfortunate position of accepting an identity rooted in humiliation while developing</a> other paths to meaning out of thin air. We are just now beginning to structure healthy identity whereas other groups have had myths and heritages given them that are several thousands of years in the making. It puts blacks, even the wealthiest of us, at a remarkable disadvantage socially and academically. I have seen all of this first hand and experienced it, quite frequently, and directly. I suspect should we poll the blacks even on these forums, even the richest, most educated among them, ninety-nine percent of them would also report feeling the weight of these pressures. The other one percent would simply lie to “get along”. Lies and one of many coping mechanisms we blacks have developed to deal with this place. But despite our denials those pressures cause us to experience higher crime, greater mental anguish, higher blood pressure, and generally poorer health than most. And even these outcomes affect our families, trickling down to destroy academic performances of the smallest among us.</p>

<p>I certainly grant we also have problems in black culture that inhibit academic progress. My buddies argue vehemently against this, but I am convinced of it. I do not, however, wish to be understood as claiming that our cultural problems are separable from the problems mentioned above. Nor do I wish to be misconstrued as blaming our SAT disparities solely on these sorts of problems. Again, the overall problem is complex, consisting of many intricately woven pressures that tend to converge in the lives of blacks from the moment they are conceived. It affects our attitudes toward prenatal care, post-natal nutrition, language, structured thought, reading, science, and mathematics. The problems in the larger culture have always created or at least exacerbated problems extant in black communities, causing us to take damaging approaches to life, health, and child development. The problems so effectively hamper the stamina and focus of black children that a $60,000 income advantage for a black family over a white one means very little, especially since the buying power of a dollar continually plummets because of inflationary theft. Because of our history and the society that history continually gives us, an average poor white infant begins in America with a significant advantage even over an average middle-class black infant. While I think none of this gives us an excuse for failing to care for our families, I do understand that we are just people like everyone else. This means we are going to respond to problems essentially as everyone else would. Our biggest problem is not that we have problems. It is that, due to our historical experience here, we are unable to absorb problems as other groups do. Increased family dissolution, for example, has affected all groups, including blacks. But due to history, blacks as a group were least able to absorb so fundamental a change. While other groups have suffered, blacks were devastated. The pressures against us are immense, and they feed other pressures, creating stigmas and hampering academic determination. Poor whites certainly have problems. But I’d wager there are few poor whites in today’s America who would willingly give up their white skin if it meant becoming a middle class black.</p>

<p>We</a> blacks can overcome all of this, especially should we focus very early on nutrition and intense education for blacks. The kids can learn at surprisingly early ages and yet develop nicely. Unfortunately I think public schools, as they now operate, are unable to help us. I do not think America can help because help requires sheer honesty and close attention to history, two things America has never had. Instead, it will take much more time than necessary, much more debate, and a lot of sweat for us to generally come to understand how we might make the proper changes, both culturally and institutionally, to bring about healing in ourselves. In the meantime, there are black kids, rich and poor, who are overcoming the difficulties I have briefly mentioned here on their own. They are just a relative few kids each year—hardly anything to cause so many teeming masses of Asian and white students to pour on the sort of heartless arrogance I commonly see on these forums. I understand I am in the minority when it comes to my view of AA, and I respect those who disagree with me agreeably, both AA supporters and otherwise. But I still think AA should be used to train attention upon these black kids to minimize the likelihood of their getting overlooked. By doing this, we help force a healthy outcome to offset so many unhealthy outcomes that have been forced on blacks for almost the entire time we have been in this place.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I challenge a supporter of racial preferences to state that fewer "under-represented" minorities is an acceptable outcome of race-blind admissions.

[/quote]
This is nothing more than a challenge for starving men to reject the food formerly stolen from them. Sure, we may boldly challenge them not to take back what was stolen, but the challenge is unimpressive. I see it like this: a man’s legacy, history, and home, were all taken away along with his chance to discover, through ancient culture, why he lives, why his parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents before him lived. That is, to a great extent, what being human is all about, and yet it was all stolen from this guy. He was taken against his will to a new land. The outcome was that he was made destitute, and uneducated. This outcome was created by American law, which also made sure the outcome would persist through time, even against the man’s progeny. The outcome was a people without the freedom to adopt the rights and practices (not even the speech!) and education of their new place of residence. It was a deliberate outcome. Finally, the laws were changed to permit the man’s progeny freedom to acquire new culture, but hatred was so great against them that the laws were ineffectual. The people were left to do what no people has ever done—namely, quick build an effective culture from scratch, and since the task is very difficult, if not impossible, the eventual outcome was a people who lived in the country but who were not genuinely of the country. Indeed, they were not of any country, due to the earlier created outcomes. Recognizing that several negative outcomes had been forced upon this people, the government further altered its laws with the aim of forcing a new, positive outcome-- one where the people would gradually acquire the education and culture of their new home. In this way, they would over time regain what was taken away, thinking their new home truly their own. When you issue your little “challenge” here, you are demanding they reject what seems to be a chance to create this positive outcome. Your challenge is patently ridiculous, which is why few, if any, will take you up on it.</p>

<p>It is also such a heartless challenge because it demands, with shameful arrogance, that blacks accept the diabolical outcomes that were forced intentionally against them via their ancestors, while rejecting the one attempt to create a positive outcome for them. Asians here never went through the sort of wholesale theft of heritage and life that blacks have endured. Not even the Japanese of WWII went through anything like this. They have no cause above blacks to expect from our government the outcome of a place they can truly call their own. The only outcome they have cause to demand is the freedom to pursue such a place. Asians now enjoy the stability of histories that brought them here of their own will, and that despite suffering has left them a sense of history and culture. Some of them apparently now sit in the comfort of that stability and issue bold challenges against people who endure the instability created by our nation’s theft. I do not think any truly thinking person will be impressed with these challenges. Unlike Asians, blacks have had something taken away that is critical to the well-being of any member of our species. They must have it back. America owes them this – not just the freedom to pursue it, but the outcome itself. Our country can ill afford to rest until this outcome is achieved.</p>

<p><a href="epiphany:">quote</a>
...the specious "Princeton study," I never brought it up in the context of this thread and this article. I don't think it's an appropriate comparison in this context

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's exquisitely on-topic, as the methodology of both studies is the same (at least until the point where this new study, which also comes out of Princeton, speculates on quality of the no-SAT admits). Whatever you find to be "specious" in the study by Espenshade et al of race in admissions will be equally specious in this study, just as anything that supports one study's approach supports the other. </p>

<p>What, then, do you suppose is "specious" in the methodology that these studies use? Is there anything that vitiates the Espenshade study but does not kill off this study, for example?</p>

<p>AdOfficer: Thank you for your informative posts. I share your philosophical position, even though it certainly didn't bebefit my daughter. She chose Barnard to not have to compete with males. Her only gripe was with Vassar. She thought that as a former women's college it should not "prefer" men. Arguments about gender balkancing did not persuade her.</p>

<p>Are Asians discriminated against in the admissions process? I have read the odious term "textureless math grind" on CC. My kids are not in this group; I am just interested.</p>

<p>BTW: I always wonder about the cultural effects of laws that made learning to read a capital crime for the student and the teacher.</p>

<p>Drosselmeir: As indicated above, I agree with your position after 25 years of teaching at a community college.</p>

<p>BTW: Were you ever in The Nutcracker? (Your name).</p>

<p>"especially since the buying power of a dollar continually plummets because of inflationary theft."</p>

<p>What the heck is that supposed to be about?</p>

<p>"But I’d wager there are few poor whites in today’s America who would willingly give up their white skin if it meant becoming a middle class black."</p>

<p>Do you know many Blacks who would give up their middle class status to become poor whites?</p>

<p>
[quote]
What the heck is that supposed to be about?

[/quote]
It means that a black who makes $70K from some government job in expensive DC is gonna be taking huge hits in spending power that he is gonna really feel with every existence of inflation, with every tick of it. That poor white guy in Appalachia also loses spending power, but he is still planting his garden, fishing the creeks and hunting squirrel and deer just as he always has. The $60K “advantage” of the black guy means nothing at all.</p>

<p>Drosselmeier,</p>

<p>The politics of victimhood are hopeless. There are too many victims in the world.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do you know many Blacks who would give up their middle class status to become poor whites?

[/quote]
Indeed yes. An</a> entire industry exists to help realize this as much as possible – such is the disastrous effect of racial preference that is ubiquitous in our society.</p>

<p>Inflation doesn't hurt poor white people, because they are all hill billys in West Virginia? Gee, thanks for the racial stereotype.</p>

<p>In my opinion eliminating the SAT in admissions would work against URM's not for them. You would have entire freshman classes with GPAs at or above 4.0. Because it is the upper middleclass kids who go to the schools that offer the most AP and IB classes they are the ones who come out witht he ridiculously weights GPAs.</p>

<p>Oh you want to not weight AP and IB classes? Good that will help. We will be have cutoffs at 3.995 for Harvard and Yale and Williams and Swarthmore. Who is then going to tale challenging courses in HS?</p>

<p>
[quote]
The politics of victimhood are hopeless. There are too many victims in the world.

[/quote]
And denial is not just a river in Egypt. I am not about being a victim. I am about being true and honest about the facts that are harming so many people. Dismissing it as “the politics of victimhood” is dishonest, in my view – shortsighted at best.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Inflation doesn't hurt poor white people, becasue they are all hill billys in West Virginia. Gee, thanks for the racial stereotype.

[/quote]
We are talking whites who make less than $10K. They certainly aren’t living in Anacostia.</p>

<p>I asked if they would give up being a middle class black to become poor whites. That is not the question you answered.</p>

<p>Actually there are more poor whites in the US outside of Appalacia than there are poor blacks in the whole country.</p>

<p>Your long post seems to aspire to victim hood.</p>