<p>"You are the one not taking everything into context."
Maybe I'm not. Probably not, actually...I don't know too much about that specific subject. However, I'm fairly sure that Harvard, at least, is less affirmative-action than other schools...I'm white and very poor (far below the poverty line) and went to a crappy rural high school, so I count as a "disadvantaged white student"...I don't know...my perception of Harvard is that it accepts students based on how well they will do there, regardless of race etc. I don't see Harvard doing what you said here: "The problem is when some black or Hispanic student who has been given all the same economic and educational opportunities as an advantaged white applicant uses his race to make up for his lack of intelligence and talent and thus undermines the intellectual community of the college, adding nothing but color." No one I've met, at least, has been like that; they are all truly "Harvard material".
"College should, for these reasons, allocate affirmative action on a socioeconomic basis. They, however, cannot do this because the decisively inferior stats of blacks and Hispanics would leave the campuses colorless." I'm a little confused...do you mean the SAT stats of comparable socioeconomic groups? I think they take those things into consideration...
Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know. Thoughts?
~lb</p>
<p>They do take socioeconomic status into consideration, but they should use that and only that. Race should not even be on the application. As I said, though, if this were the case then there would be few blacks and hispanics. Also, I have witnessed first hand one black student and two hispanic ones take advantage of the system.</p>
<p>I know I'm jumping in here and it probably isn't smart.. lol.. I don't want to attack anyone, just putting in my two cents:</p>
<p>Whether or not a person agrees with AA or not, I don't think that a person who may have benefited from the AA policy should have to feel "guilty" or otherwise for being admitted to Harvard. First, I don't believe that SAT scores (within a few hundred points) say anything much about the qualifications of the applicant or the ability of the applicant to succeed at Harvard or any other university. Second, it is obvious that no person can help his or her race. No one should have to feel guilty for collateral matters having to do with race or ethnicity. It is hardly fair for you to expect luckygirl to feel badly for "taking the place of a better-qualified non-URM" (i know this isn't a direct quote, i'm just paraphrasing). Third, I agree with lowellbelle in that the fact remains that Harvard admitted the students that it did for a reason - Harvard could have found another URM or admitted a non-URM who may or may not have been better-qualified. No one is admitted simply for being a URM -- there are many factors far beyond race/ethnicity that play a far greater role in deciding whether to admit or deny admission. I am sure that luckygirl's contribution to Harvard as a student and person can hardly be measured in terms of SAT scores.</p>
<p>Man, I'd feel terrible if I took someone's place who deserved it more. I can't imagine someone telling me that all of my hard(er) work didn't matter because of something nobody has any control over. </p>
<p>Of course, I'm a white male from the suburbs so if I get in I probably don't have to worry about that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Man, I'd feel terrible if I took someone's place who deserved it more.
[/quote]
How would you possibly know whether or not you "took" the place of someone who deserved it more? It isn't really possible for anyone to determine why or why not they were chosen for admission over another individual (beyond obvious factors like big differences in GPA, etc). The admissions office is building an entire class, and sometimes it comes down to sheer LUCK -- do you bring the unique skills/background/etc. that they are looking for? It could come down to geographic diversity or socioeconomic diversity or that a tuba player is graduating or that they need students who are interested in a new department of study they're trying to build up. It's impossible for us (as applicants) to really know.</p>
<p>I hope that you, if admitted as a white male from the suburbs, will not feel as if you have "earned" your spot at Harvard "more" than a URM or other student. That kind of thinking (which your post implies, whether inadverdently or not) smacks of bigotry to me. Should I, as an Asian, feel especially entitled because I've gained admission to Harvard "despite" my race or ethnicity? I know - and I hope that you know too - that the answer is an unequivocal NO.</p>
<p>Why to feel guilty...?</p>
<p>Because black people recognize that if they checked off the 'white' ethnicity box instead of the 'black' one, chances are slim that they would have still gotten in. The black people that do feel guilty feel that way because Harvard is supposed to accept the most qualified- the best and the brightest. Sure, there is always some luck, but by marking black you get several more metaphorical lottery tickets. And 'black' isn't an accomplishment like winning a national award that legitmately should get several more lottery tickets.</p>
<p>It isn't something you should have to feel guilty for, EITHER! What a novel concept...</p>
<p>You are making very broad generalizations. The black race is not a giant conglomerate or societal entity, it is a group made up of many different and diverse individuals. Statements like "they feel guity" or "black people know" are, for lack of a better word, ridiculous.</p>
<p>All black people don't feel guilty. The 'they' was referring to black people that may feel guilty, a big difference from all black people. I will edit that to improve clarity. But don't get caught up in semantics. I am just explaining a phenomenon.</p>
<p>It's interesting that being a URM is only an advantage in one area of life -- college admissions. In all other areas of life (e.g. job interviews; chances of being born into a richer family; chances of being arrested for a crime, which, when the equivalent is commited by a white person, does not result in an arrest; etc.) URMs get the crappy end of the deal. Should whites feel perpetually guilty for the "perks" they get throughout life just for being white? NO, because they cannot help their race anymore than a black individual. Life will never be FAIR. AA is an attempt to level the playing field but it cannot satisfy everybody. And though white people should obviously not have to feel guilty for being white, this does not mean that society should avoid changing the status quo. Measures toward greater equality should be promoted while avoiding the "blame game" of race and fair opportunity.</p>
<p>ok, how about legacies, children of faculty, and all groups with extra "lottery tickets"? Obviously, Harvard, the private institution, has reserved spots for them, not for you (if you're not one of them). They're not taking your spots, they're taking the spots Harvard reserved for THEM. Not you. Them. Should they feel guilty because they're so lucky as to have special spots reserved for them by Harvard? Surely, if anybody SHOULD feel guilty, or is responsible, its Harvard. Harvard sets this agenda, whatever you may think of it.</p>
<p>Two chickens- I agree will you completely about legacies, and most legacies will probably have that nagging feeling...would I have gotten in without legacy status? However, according to thet UVa study, and going back to the metaphorical lottery tickets, a regular (white) applicant gets 1 ticket. A legacy gets 4.3. A black person gets 111. That nagging feeling turns into guilt sometimes for the black person because it is usually true that s/he wouldn't have gotten in without the racial hook and the UVa study shows just how dramatic that hook is. </p>
<p>As for:</p>
<p>"URMs get the crappy end of the deal."</p>
<p>Huge generalization. Such stereotyping. Incredible ignorance. Look, the fact is, a white person who has been on the "crappy end" of life is still going to be at a big disadvantage to a rich black person.</p>
<p>My bad -- I did not mean that every black person is worse off than every white person. I meant that statistically the stuff I mentioned earlier is true. Hence, the reason i used the word "CHANCES." My information comes from The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker.</p>
<p>Okay, that's fine, but it is actually a big difference that saying URMs are more likely to be poor and saying all URMs are poor. Let's face it- poor people have less resources and should probably receive a little slack in the admissions process because of that. But AA strips away all of that and just focuses on race and not socio-economic status and when that difference results in about 111 tickets instead of 1, it is huge.</p>
<p>Again! You say black people get more tickets than other people. Who gives out tickets? HARVARD! Why do you suggest, legacies or some accepted black people ought to have "nagging feelings," and say NOTHING of Harvard, the SOURCE of this policy. Is your delicate sense of righteousness, the compassion you have for those (white, asian etc.) whose spots are taken, so subtle that you blame only those LEAST responsible? You blame only the students who have as little control over Harvard policies as you do.</p>
<p>also the "111" quote mentioned a control for "residence," does that control for income level?</p>
<p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but if the control was for residence then wouldn't that make the situation even more unfair? Because then the income levels of the blacks, whites, and legacies are nearly even, yet blacks still get that huge advantage of 111:1:4.3</p>
<p>m_c, it would be very easy to find out whether you were truly qualified for Harvard; don't check the the minority boxes, and throw yourself into the rat race with all those who don't get a hand-up in admissions.</p>
<p>twochickens: That's like saying it's fine for me to do whatever I want as long as the law allows it. It would be embarrassing if my conscience was so weak that it needed the law to persuade me as to the nature of right and wrong.
Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should.</p>
<p>Harvard wants a certain number or percentage of ethnically diverse students, right? So those students are competing for THEIR spots. YOU will never get those spots.</p>
<p>IF a URM student checked off the "white" box, THEN he would be competing for YOUR spots! So the URM individual isn't taking ANYTHING away from you. However, Harvard, the institution, is reserving spots away from you. If you think that's wrong, you must blame Harvard for thus dividing the competition!</p>
<p>Stop telling URM's to pose as white students, then there will be even MORE "white" kids competing for that limited amount of spots, and even LESS URM kids competing for their seperate spots!</p>
<p>THANK YOU, twochickens. That suggestion was so absurd I didn't even know how to respond.</p>
<p>Anyway, I'M ASIAN! I'm not a URM and I'm not about to check "white" or any other box because I'm Asian! I didn't CARE enough about getting admitted to Harvard to even think about lying about my race. Honestly, I didn't even want to apply to Harvard to begin with -- Yale was my far-and-away top choice. After being admitted, however, I visited and discovered what an amazing school + environment it is and I could not be happier that I'm going in the fall. But seriously, if you care that much about getting admitted to Harvard to worry THAT much about race and chances and blahblahblah then you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Everyone who applies to Harvard should prepare for (and, to a certain extent, EXPECT) rejection. Focus on your own application -- you cannot change your race, you cannot do anything about the tens of thousands of other people vying for the same spots, you cannot affect the decision of the admissions officers in ANY WAY except by making YOUR own application the best that YOU can make it. End of story!</p>