<p>What if there wasn't even a place to mark your race on applications? How much would admissions and enrollment change? What about if your disadvantage could only be expressed in an essay? Not I am [insert race], but I am [disadvantaged because]. Would admissions be better without that one little box?</p>
<p>I don't know..look at the UC system of admission (they don't have a race box) and their student populations and you tell me...it really differs from opinion to opinion and other varying factors, race is not the all-deciding factor in admissions...</p>
<p>its not the all-deciding to be sure, but it can be like a few hundred more on the SAT or a GPA 10% higher...</p>
<p>At the top 50ish schools in the nation:
minority enrollment drops 50-85% and average SAT/GPA of admits goes up substantially.</p>
<p>Below the top 50ish schools:
not much - less racially discrimination in financial aid and no more scholarships open only to blacks/non-whites.</p>
<p>Study Grutz/Grutter SCOTUS cases to see what UMichigan thought would happen if race was no longer an issue.</p>
<p>Read the amicus briefs from Grutter/Gratz for what Princeton/Harvard/Duke/Stanford thought would happen if they could no longer use race (all said minority enrollment would drop exponentially).</p>
<p>See California after prep 209 for a real-life example of what happens.
At UC-Berkeley and LA minority numbers dropped (they've come back up for the most part).
Minority failout rates came much closer to their peers (had been running almost 3x as high before 209).
Average SAT/GPA went up.</p>
<p>how did minority enrollment come back up? If minority enrollment comes back up and equal to university wide graduation rates then isnt it a good thing?</p>
<p>Here is a question for everyone that I've been wondering...it's not meant to be controversial or anything, I'm just curious...What kind of stats does a URM have to have before people against AA realize they did not get in, because of AA, but on their own merit?</p>
<p>I'm on the fence about affirmative action but I imagine the stats would be what are average for the university and graduation rates would be similar.</p>
<p>
[quote]
how did minority enrollment come back up? If minority enrollment comes back up and equal to university wide graduation rates then isnt it a good thing?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some improvement in overall minority stats but mostly through psuedo-affirmative action programs (top 4% plan, "location" based affirmative action where they would target schools known to be majority minority, etc).</p>
<p>those plans seem fine if minorities who enroll do well once at the university</p>
<p>This is from College Board...</p>
<p>1st year students
UCLA:
Student Body
<1% American Indian/Alaskan Native
40% Asian/Pacific Islander
3% Black/Non-Hispanic
14% Hispanic
35% White/Non-Hispanic
3% Non-Resident Alien
4% Race/ethnicity unreported </p>
<p>UC-Berkeley:
Student Body
<1% American Indian/Alaskan Native
44% Asian/Pacific Islander
3% Black/Non-Hispanic
9% Hispanic
32% White/Non-Hispanic
3% Non-Resident Alien
9% Race/ethnicity unreported </p>
<p>As you notice, there is a significant percentage of Asian students in UCLA and UC Berkely, when compared to other schools outside the UC System. The percentage for Hispanics seem to be on level with other colleges outside the UC System, but their African American percentages are way below the average of all the other school outside the UC System, same goes for the white/non hispanic percentages.</p>