<p>No, it's unfair.</p>
<p>It's unfair to me that my classmates (I go to a 95% black school) have a better chance of getting into MIT with the same stuff even though we come from similar backgrounds.</p>
<p>If we're going to progress, we need to put the past BEHIND us. Forget it. Coexist. Race shouldn't matter.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Race shouldn't matter.
[/quote]
LOL, try asking that question...a few decades ago.</p>
<p>now is not a few decades ago.</p>
<p>Affirmative Action eh? here's my thoughts:</p>
<p>Yes, as a <em>relatively</em> wealthy Asian, I would be discriminated against either by socioeconomic factors or by my race, but I see that not as a barrier that bars me from passing, but merely another obstacle over which I must hurdle. "The man" says I have to work harder to compete with others possibly less fortunate than me? So be it, I worked harder. They say I must diversify myself from the stereotypical Indian kid who plays the piano and tennis? Did that too. In fact, I usually don't hang out with most of the other indian kids at my school. I feel like I relate more to people who think similarly to me, not those who LOOK similar to me.</p>
<p>So Affirmative Action you ask? Bring it on :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
i don't think that hispanics and african americans should just sit back, relax, and just depend on affirmative action.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>^^thats what you think is happening? Hispanics and African Americans are simply kicking back and depending on Affirmative Action and Welfare right? What a pricelessly ignorant view.</p>
<p>And a lot of you seem to have this idea that colleges think all urms have "earned" Affirmative Action. Its not about the individual, its about the school and about the society. </p>
<p>and no, race shouldn't matter. But if we are going to make it so that it truly doesn't matter, we have to make it so that races are truly equal and not vulnerable to oppression by society. </p>
<p>I'm also disturbed by the comments that urms don't make it in "on their own merits". They make it in on their merits just as much as any of you make it in on your merits. There is nothing that says someone with a 2400 SAT score is more qualified than someone with a 2100 SAT score to go to college. period.</p>
<p>The poor inner-city kid with a 2300 SAT is likely to bring more to a school than the prep-school kid with a 2310 SAT. The former had to overcome her environment, while the latter was supported by hers.</p>
<p>There is something wrong when one kid gets a 1900 and a 4.0 and gets in columbia while another kid gets a 2150, 4.5 with leadership and gets rejected from columbia. </p>
<p>I'll leave the rest for you guys to figure out.</p>
<p>I don't think it's right that people be given an advantage (or a disadvantage if you're not a URM) because of something that they have NO CONTROL over. Last time I checked, we didn't get to pick what race we were born into.</p>
<p>The best colleges don't even have to worry about state-mandated affirmative action. The Ivy league and other top schools are mainly concerned with trying to create a superficial *image *of diversity.</p>
<p>It'll be a while before people realize that 'diversity' isn't reliant on one's race or nationality. True diversity depends personality.</p>
<p>Affirmative action is just negative in general. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Affirmative action gives well-sought positions to the under qualified. I could care less about undergrad AA. But if an under represented minority got into med school with significantly lower MCAT scores and GPA, that's hurting the nation's health care.</p>
<ol>
<li>Affirmative action provides a negative stereotype for minorities. Some African-Americans and Hispanics are highly qualified and must live with a chip on their shoulder because everyone thinks they got where they are through affirmative action.</li>
</ol></li>
<li><p>Affirmative action allows for one race to be discriminated relative to others. No race should be given an advantage regardless of past societal actions. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>No, I am not bitter at affirmative action, since thus far it has not affected me. However, I still disagree with it in principle because affirmative action sacrifices quality for diversity.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But if an under represented minority got into med school with significantly lower MCAT scores and GPA, that's hurting the nation's health care.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Show me the research that proves that a URM with, say a 30 MCAT, is going to be a worse doctor than an ORM with a 34 MCAT.</p>
<p>^Show me the research that proves they'll do better.</p>
<p>Yes, I know that's a fallacy, but if MCAT doesn't at least suggest that someone will do better the higher score they get, what's the point of having it at all?</p>
<p>^ I never said that they would. And do better at what? Being a doctor? I can assure you that being a doctor is nothing like taking a standardized test.</p>
<p>^No. But going to Med School is, and often the better someone does in med school, the better doctor they have a chance of becoming.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, I know that's a fallacy, but if MCAT doesn't at least suggest that someone will do better the higher score they get, what's the point of having it at all?
[/quote]
ehhh don't be so naive. there are a lot of things that affect how good a doctor is and i think it's pretty safe to say that his or her MCAT score is probably one of the less significant factors.</p>
<p>
[quote]
1. Affirmative action gives well-sought positions to the under qualified. I could care less about undergrad AA. But if an under represented minority got into med school with significantly lower MCAT scores and GPA, that's hurting the nation's health care.
[/quote]
first of all, a doctor's GPA and MCAT score does not affect how good of a doctor he or she is; honestly, it's pretty stupid to think it does. in case you didn't know, doctors are not always the smartest people and, also, once you get into medical school whether or not you succeed is largely determined by how hard you work. so what's your point?</p>
<p>second, you are ignorant of the fact that without AA, more qualified minorities are typically turned down for lower qualified whites. there was a study done that showed that the person with the "black sounding" name was typically turned down in favor of other less qualified individuals from other ethnicities. in addition, blacks who are highly qualified to receive loans are routinely denied even though individuals of other races with inferior credentials are given loans. reality simply contradicts your first point.</p>
<p>
[quote]
2. Affirmative action provides a negative stereotype for minorities. Some African-Americans and Hispanics are highly qualified and must live with a chip on their shoulder because everyone thinks they got where they are through affirmative action.
[/quote]
no it's people like you who create this negative stereotype about URMs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
3. Affirmative action allows for one race to be discriminated relative to others. No race should be given an advantage regardless of past societal actions.
[/quote]
not really. you ought to review a couple of the Supreme Court rulings regarding AA before making such a heated assertion. as long as the Supreme Court rules that diversity (of all kinds) is a legitimate goal then colleges will able to pursue policies that allow them to shape their student body.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, I am not bitter at affirmative action, since thus far it has not affected me. However, I still disagree with it in principle because affirmative action sacrifices quality for diversity.
[/quote]
how exactly does it sacrifice quality, and what exactly do you mean by quality? also how does one quantify quality in regards to college admissions?</p>
<p>anyways, a lot of people would argue that not promoting a diverse student body would actually hurt the quality of the school.</p>
<p>EDIT:
[quote]
No. But going to Med School is, and often the better someone does in med school, the better doctor they have a chance of becoming.
[/quote]
ehhh... MCAT does not predict whether or not someone will succeed in medical school.</p>
<p>EDIT2:
also, bringing up the whole MCAT and doctor thing is just SO stupid... have you guys ever heard of the USMLE?</p>
<p>EDIT3:
[quote]
But if an under represented minority got into med school with significantly lower MCAT scores and GPA, that's hurting the nation's health care.
[/quote]
i'm sorry but i can't get over this one... my goodness... jeez. you can't actually think that this is a legitimate/good argument? LOL... actually you know what maybe you're right. maybe that's what's wrong with our healthcare system today? we're feeling the effects of allowing more minorities into the health profession. oh man, some one call Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. this kid has figured out an even better solution to the woes of the health care system! (sorry, for being a douche but this is among the worst arguments i've heard in my life.)</p>
<p>^You're probably right. I'll be the first (or, in this case, the second) to admit when I'm wrong.</p>
<p>I do think, however, that AA was useful when it was first implemented, but probably isn't so much anymore. I don't think colleges discriminate based on race as much, and in fact URM is now a hook. So it's probably not as necessary now as it was back in the day.</p>
<p>
Show me the research that proves that a URM with, say a 30 MCAT, is going to be a worse doctor than an ORM with a 34 MCAT.</p>
<p>I never said that they would. And do better at what? Being a doctor? I can assure you that being a doctor is nothing like taking a standardized test.
</p>
<p>I'll admit that I have no support for my med school example at the moment, and that test scores and GPA (I included them together) aren't entirely indicative of performance. However, I still maintain that allowing URM with lower scores and grades than someone else is hindering full capacity</p>
<p>"Healthy</a>" Medical School Admissions | FairTest</p>
<p>From this:
"The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education estimated that if the top 10 highest-ranking medical schools in the nation dismantled their affirmative action policies and replaced them with strict MCAT cut-off scores, only 7 Black students would meet entrance requirements" (Citation 4)</p>
<p>"Another study revealed that under admissions in which MCAT scores are of primary importance, the percentage of Blacks enrolled at the 25 most selective medical schools would drop from 10% to 1%" (Citation 5)</p>
<p>That says something about the quality of affirmative action candidates</p>
<p>Furthermore, Richard H. Sander has done and continues to do studies about affirmative action with relation to law school. Minorities have been found to have lower grades and higher fail % in the bar exam.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I do think, however, that AA was useful when it was first implemented, but probably isn't so much anymore. I don't think colleges discriminate based on race as much, and in fact URM is now a hook. So it's probably not as necessary now as it was back in the day.
[/quote]
colleges have the right to create a diverse student body; thus they consider race. the supreme court has ruled that it is legal to consider race in order to promote diversity in this circumstance.</p>
<p>the reason why being a URM is a hook is because so few URMs apply to college in the first place. that's why the are UNDERREPRESENTED.</p>
<p>why does everyone harp on race/African Americans? women benefit the most from AA. look at medical school admisions. AA has made women overrepresented in a field they were once underrepresented in. (in fact, now being a male is sort of a hook.)</p>
<p>sockpuppet:
that same webpage contradicts what you said about the MCAT being a predictor how how good of a doctor someone will be.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That says something about the quality of affirmative action candidates
[/quote]
LOL from the same page you provided:
[quote]
In fact, since test scores substantially fail to predict success, medical school admissions offices can promote equity and excellence simultaneously by deemphasizing test scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>basically making a strict cutoff score would actually serve NO beneficial purpose lol. also, i am pretty sure that all races benefit by their not being a cutoff score.</p>
<p>i'm all for affirmative action based on socio-economic factors, because you're bound to establish diversity that way, too.</p>
<p>i think a lot of kids here come from privileged environments and thus, can't conceptualize the factors that make inner-city kids struggle. they SHOULD be viewed in a different context than the average kid who has been catered to by his environment. hell, i'm in nyc, and most of inner-city schools are ****holes, while westchester county, a mere 25 minutes from the bronx has top-notch high schools. i know tons of people who go up to the day before the SAT not knowing what the test entails. </p>
<p>on a broader note, i think people over estimate minority status in admissions. i think the committee isn't stupid, and they know that a minority with a high income, going to school in a prestigious high school is not the same as the person who they should, justifiably, be using a a for. so it does level out.</p>