<p>My purpose for posting on this thread was not so that anyone would argue with me, nor are my intentions to call someone else out. The reason I like these controversial threads is because they inspire thought and I just thought I'd input my own current ideas. If I am in fact living in a world of oblivion, just let me stay there please.</p>
<p>affirmative action only comes into GREAT schools like Yale, UCLA right?</p>
<p>They've got nerve to complain when they even have the opportunity to go there.</p>
<p>end to racial discrimination!</p>
<p>"since the group who would benefit the most from socioeconomic AA is whites since they have the most poor people. Asians would be MUCH worse of in this sort of system especially if colleges took socioeconomic diversity and racial diversity equally serious"</p>
<p>Asians would benefit the most from economic AA, because, at all income and age levels, Asians on average, perform better in school than other groups at the same level. It doesn't matter that there are more poor caucasians. If admission were based on, e.g., just the two factors of SAT scores and family incomes, Asians' higher SAT scores will win out over caucasians at the same income level.</p>
<p>I agree with bohemian; the exchange of ideas is the benefit here.</p>
<p>You mean poor asians would benefit...</p>
<p>It doesn't matter about ALL incomes, just the lower incomes if there was to be an economic AA.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, i would never suggest that my peer shouldn't major in math. I took class with them for two years and they were very bright. I just can't get over the fact thought that their race boosted them to a higher position than someone who had an even greater drive. Obviously, they had no disadvantages in their life.
[/quote]
well you don't know everything about this kid's life. it's pretty ignorant of you to say, "Obviously, they had no disadvantages in their life." i just don't understand how you could determine that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I agree, insane was a bad word choice, i was tired, but just a few decades ago, it was needed. Race put people at an obvious disadvantage even in the middle and upper-class schools. Things have changed though (at least in certain areas) and all i was saying is that now the help should be shifted to those who need it.
[/quote]
you are still not understanding the point that AA's primary purpose is not used to correct the social injustices of institutionalized racism but to legally allow schools to create diverse student bodies. whether or not you think that creating a diverse student body is legitimate is a whole different discussion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Asians would benefit the most from economic AA, because, at all income and age levels, Asians on average, perform better in school than other groups at the same level. It doesn't matter that there are more poor caucasians. If admission were based on, e.g., just the two factors of SAT scores and family incomes, Asians' higher SAT scores will win out over caucasians at the same income level.
[/quote]
you completely misinterpreted what socioeconomic AA would entail. it benefits students from lower income families period. the reason why socioeconomic would put Asians at a bigger "disadvantage" is because Asians are the wealthiest income group on average in the United States. in fact, Asians make $10,000 dollars more on average than Whites do.</p>
<p>2005 Census:
[quote]
Black households had the lowest median income in 2004 ($30,134) among race groups. Asian households had the highest median income ($57,518). The median income for non-Hispanic white households was $48,977. Median income for Hispanic households was $34,241.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
You mean poor asians would benefit...
[/quote]
true, but there aren't very many poor Asians. poverty rate for Asians in 2004 was under 10%. on top of that Asians make up such a small percentage of the population. you're talking about a very select few Asians (in terms of actual numbers, not rates) who would benefit.</p>
<p>Those involved in education almost unanimously agree that a culturally and ethnically diverse student body facilitates the learning and growth environments and better prepares people to compete in a global economy. </p>
<p>So whether or not a lot of 17 year olds value diversity is irrelevant because to be blunt, they're not expected to. </p>
<p>That point aside, many of you need to get it through your skulls that admission to a top university is NOT some kind of reward for being the best. You are not any better than anybody else for getting admitted to Harvard. So there is no "sacrificing quality" or "totally unfair". Because contrary to the game that many admissions books you've read try to make it out as, college admissions is NOT a competition. The university picks people it likes, period. </p>
<p>Also, you can't deny the positive aspects of AA in that it is helping to close th e gap in education between urms and other ethnic groups, a gap that really shouldn't exist in the first place. If at some level all groups are receiving the same educational opportunities they should be better positioned to gain opportunities in life. </p>
<p>And obviously the problem supersedes economics because the poorest asians are still outscoring the richest blacks and Hispanics.</p>
<p>We have a problem involving RACE in america. Whether we like it or not, if we believe the inequalities are inexcusable, the solutions must involve race as well.</p>
<p>"you completely misinterpreted what socioeconomic AA would entail. it benefits students from lower income families period"</p>
<p>No, and yes. Lower income Asian kids' test scores and GPAs are higher than other lower income groups, so they will be picked up first. We're not talking (necessarily) about poverty, but incomes below being able to pay for college. What actually happens would indeed depend on program parameters (e.g., where the SAT and GPA cut-points are chosen).</p>
<p>On average (the only thing policy deals with) lower income Asians may indeed displace upper income Asians.</p>
<p>vossron:
you are completely ignoring/missing the fact that there are few poor Asians. socioeconomic AA benefits groups based on their size, since the larger the group, the more poor people it has.</p>
<p>
[quote]
On average (the only thing policy deals with) lower income Asians may indeed displace upper income Asians.
[/quote]
not quite clear what you are trying to say here but socioeconomic AA would be based on class (income ranges) not just income.</p>
<p>for example, Applicant X (2100 SAT, $80,000 a year) would not have an advantage over Applicant Y (2100 SAT, $100,000 a year) because they basically are from the same socioeconomic class. however, Applicant X would be "disadvantaged" when compare to Applicant Z (1900 SAT, $25,000) because they are not with in the same socioeconomic class; one's from the upper middle class whereas the other is from the lower middle class/poor.</p>
<p>also, for some reason i haven't mentioned this, but socioeconomic AA would be impossible to implement since socioeconomic class varies state by state. for example a person making $40,000 a year in South Dakota would be fairly well off whereas a person making the same amount in New York would be lower middle class. how would colleges take this into consideration? assess the quality of your school and look at the opportunities actually provided to you? if that's your answer then i hope you are aware that college already do this.</p>
<p>in addition, socioeconomic AA would also be incredibly unfair since there are so many different ways a family can use their income. if a family making $60,000 a year chooses to stretch and send their kid to a great college prep school that kid will receive a huge advantage over kids from a similar socio-economic background. is it fair to punish kids simply because their parents did not value education as some other parents? no. again, how would colleges take this into consideration? assess the quality of your school and look at the opportunities actually provided to you? if that's your answer then i hope you are aware that college already do this.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So whether or not a lot of 17 year olds value diversity is irrelevant because to be blunt, they're not expected to.
[/quote]
agreed. it's shameful and disappointing to see so many otherwise intelligent kids making such ignorant statements.</p>
<p>I seriously don't think you peeps completely understand. It's not like, There is a black person with 2100 and 3.8 and then a white person with 2250 and 4.0 and the black person gets in. They actually read all the essays, look at all your ECs, and check out your entire profile and seriously look at each applicant. While being an underrepresented minority helps a university with it's whole diverse movement they don't bas everything on that. They do not just compare two different students and then start choosing one over the other. If the school wants you, you'll get in. If the school doesn't feel like giving you admission, a black/mexican/white/asian/native american did not TAKE your spot.</p>
<p>"you are completely ignoring/missing the fact that there are few poor Asians"</p>
<p>I see the difference. You are looking at raw numbers of students and I'm looking at percentages of races.</p>
<p>Example: An AA drop of 10 SAT points will pick up essentially all Asians, but a small percentage of non-Asians. Maybe the raw numbers of non-Asians is higher, but the point of AA is to increase percentages, because that's the way we measure inequality. We don't say that because there are more caucasians than Asians in school, that caucasians are better represented.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Example: An AA drop of 10 SAT points will pick up essentially all Asians, but a small percentage of non-Asians. Maybe the raw numbers of non-Asians is higher, but the point of AA is to increase percentages, because that's the way we measure inequality. We don't say that because there are more caucasians than Asians in school, that caucasians are better represented.
[/quote]
i am not sure what you are trying to say, so can you please elaborate some more?</p>
<p>^^He's saying that it is more accurate to compare proportions than numbers.</p>
<p>^^Correct, but to refine: It's more meaningful to compare proportions than numbers.</p>
<p>First, what is the goal of AA? I think we would generally say "equality" but there are many ways to define equality. In our context here, I assume it's equal opportunity to attend college, but even that may be subject to different interpretations.</p>
<p>A disproportionate percentage of Asians already attend college (I think because Asian families, on average, value education more than other groups do). Most Asian 18-year-olds in any given family income band are qualified for college, more so than other racial groups. Most Asian kids who can afford college are already attending. So if economic AA targets lower-income students, an even higher percentage of Asians will attend college.</p>
<p>If a school wanted to prevent the percentage of Asians from rising due to economic AA, it could reject one high-income Asian for every low-income Asian admitted.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So if economic AA targets lower-income students, an even higher percentage of Asians will attend college.
[/quote]
not true, because poorer Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, all of whom have both larger populations and higher poverty rates, would push out higher income Asians (majority of Asians). lower income Asians would benefit from socioeconomic AA; however, they are not all that common so they would make up a rather small number of college applicants. </p>
<p>when i say socioeconomic AA would not benefit Asians, i mean that it would not benefit a majority of Asians, since a majority of them are not low income. i am not saying that because they are Asians socioeconomic AA would not apply to them... if that's what you're thinking?</p>
<p>"Asians would be MUCH worse off in this sort of system"</p>
<p>I suspect we need some real demographic numbers to get any further. I believe we've had a tremendous influx from poorer Asian countries in recent years, but that may be due to where I live.</p>
<p>The MCAT is:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>It is the single best predictor of whether a student has the aptitude to pass the medical board examinations at the end of the second year of medical school.</p></li>
<li><p>It is a measure of whether the student's grades are inflated.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The LSAT is:</p>
<p>The single best predictor of whether individuals has the aptitude to pass the bar.</p>
<p>Anything else that is put forth is absolutely incorrect.</p>
<p>Some sobering info:</p>
<p>Racial</a> Preferences at Medical Schools Result in Minority Failure</p>
<p>Also, up thread, whoever said that high MCAT scores do not guarantee if one is a good doctor. True. It only "guarantees" who is likely to pass the licensing exam so they can work as a doctor.</p>
<p>I'm still right.......</p>
<p>
[quote]
I suspect we need some real demographic numbers to get any further. I believe we've had a tremendous influx from poorer Asian countries in recent years, but that may be due to where I live.
[/quote]
dude just give it up... Asians make up a VERY small percentage of the US population. they're a smaller percentage than African Americans and Hispanics for sure.</p>
<p>The only thing I don't understand is that why do you have to look different to be "diverse"? To me, people who have different ways of thinking, hobbies, interests and such are diverse.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only thing I don't understand is that why do you have to look different to be "diverse"? To me, people who have different ways of thinking, hobbies, interests and such are diverse.
[/quote]
well because a person's race significantly affects his or her life and the way in which he or she sees the world. other things also influence a person's perception of the world but i think that the most influential factors are a person's family background/home life, socioeconomic class, and race.</p>