Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry but I don't buy some of the outrage by white people about Asian students disadvantage in college admissions, because the outrage is completely selective.
"Asian Americans are indeed treated unfairly in admissions, but affirmative action is a convenient scapegoat for those who seek to pit minority groups against each other. A more logical target would be “the preferences of privilege,” as I called them in my 2006 book, “The Price of Admission.”
These policies elevate predominantly white, affluent applicants: children of alumni, big non-alumni donors, politicians and celebrities, as well as recruited athletes in upper-crust sports like golf, sailing, horseback riding, crew and even, at some colleges, polo. The number of whites enjoying the preferences of privilege, I concluded, outweighed the number of minorities aided by affirmative action.
By giving more slots to already advantaged students, these preferences displace more deserving candidates from other backgrounds, including Asian Americans and middle-class whites, without achieving the goals of affirmative action, such as diversity and redressing historical discrimination."
Regarding the plaintiff in the Harvard lawsuit:
"She was discovered through a broad-based campaign conducted by SFFA founder Edward Blum — a frustrated Republican congressional candidate who has chosen to make a career out of waging war on laws and policies that give "special privileges" to minorities. Dou was someone Blum wanted -- a student willing to serve as a test case in a high-profile attack on affirmative action.
Asians are a pawn in the game, and a lot of people bring up Asians as an example of the "model minority" to bring down or criticize other minorities. You don't find them comparing Asian students to whites and suggesting that white students have something to learn from their example, even though they greatly outpace whites academically.
Sorry but I don't buy some of the outrage by white people about Asian students disadvantage in college admissions, because the outrage is completely selective.
"Asian Americans are indeed treated unfairly in admissions, but affirmative action is a convenient scapegoat for those who seek to pit minority groups against each other. A more logical target would be “the preferences of privilege,” as I called them in my 2006 book, “The Price of Admission.”
These policies elevate predominantly white, affluent applicants: children of alumni, big non-alumni donors, politicians and celebrities, as well as recruited athletes in upper-crust sports like golf, sailing, horseback riding, crew and even, at some colleges, polo. The number of whites enjoying the preferences of privilege, I concluded, outweighed the number of minorities aided by affirmative action.
By giving more slots to already advantaged students, these preferences displace more deserving candidates from other backgrounds, including Asian Americans and middle-class whites, without achieving the goals of affirmative action, such as diversity and redressing historical discrimination."
Regarding the plaintiff in the Harvard lawsuit:
"She was discovered through a broad-based campaign conducted by SFFA founder Edward Blum — a frustrated Republican congressional candidate who has chosen to make a career out of waging war on laws and policies that give "special privileges" to minorities. Dou was someone Blum wanted -- a student willing to serve as a test case in a high-profile attack on affirmative action. Asians are a pawn in the game.
But in the case of the specialized high schools, there is no criteria for anything except the test. What de Blasio is trying to do is basically an extreme form of affirmative action
Your analogies do not hold at all (as usual), because Germany, Poland, Portugal and Spain do not give Jewish kids any quota-based preference for educational or employment opportunities, bypassing test scores and other forms of demonstrated proficiency for a certain training or job. "The right to return to these nations" has nothing to do with AAs, since AAs were never expelled from the US, nor they ever decided they had to escape from the US in large numbers. Nobody in these four European countries needs to have a certain number of employees that wear yarmulke in order to avoid being labeled antisemitic.
It is unheard of Jews using the Holocaust (or a few thousand years of horrible persecution) as a historic excuse for dropping out of school, not working, having a high rate of teenage pregnancy, drug use and violent crime. While the history of AAs includes routine separating of husbands, wives and children by selling them to different slave owners, the history of Eastern European Jews includes routine raids on Jewish villages where family members were separated by murder. While kids were routinely taken away from AA mothers and sent somewhere else, pregnant Jewish women would be often caught during the above mentioned raids, their abdomen slashed, and the baby replaced with a live rabbit or dog.
A lot (thank goodness, not all) AAs constantly use their horrible history as an excuse for every personal failure; most Jews rarely talk about their more horrible history while working hard on their greater or lesser success (and I have never, literally never, heard a Jewish person blaming the history for their personal failure). For the record, I am not Jewish myself (if anything, people of one of my ancestral nations have done horrible things to Jews), so these are totally self-disinterested observations.
You might have grounds for a lawsuit if you can demonstrate how exactly you were personally harmed by the US government. Were certain people interned in the South Bronx in the 1980s, or did they voluntarily decide to follow the trail of crack cocaine? Do the descendents of the Japanese who were interned in WW2 camps have an eternal right to very dysproportionally large share of taxpayer support, do they get generational free housing, health care and food in NYC, do they get preferential quota-based admission into competitive schools and jobs?
Lastly, as Columbia was an elite men's college, there were also elite women's colleges that did not admit men. Worldwide women's rights movements are are much older than the Civil Rights movement in fhe US, and have followed very different paths. As a European-born woman with two doctoral-level degrees, and a lot of training beyond these degrees, I know exactly how a woman (or anybody else) achieves anything fairly. by personal effort. Marie Currie (long before the US civil rights movement) did not discover radioactivity because of any special privileges extended to her by any political movement.
MeToo also has nothing to do with AAs (except for Bill Cosby, but I don't think even you can turn his situation into an argument in favor of extending special privileges to AAs :-).
So there are quotas in college admissions? Please explain.
Why are you upset about affirmative action for blacks but not for the advantage that it has given to women?
But in the case of the specialized high schools, there is no criteria for anything except the test. What de Blasio is trying to do is basically an extreme form of affirmative action
The discussion hasn't been focused solely on specialized HS admissions. And there have been a lot of general comments in the vein of they (black/hispanic people students) need to be like them (Asians or Jews).
The discussion hasn't been focused on specialized HS admissions. There have been a lot of general comments in the vein of they (black/hispanic people students) need to be like them (Asians or Jews).
While I would like both black and Latino kids to do better in school, I definitely disagree that they need to be like Asian nerds to succeed. Most white kids don't even do the "Asian tiger kid" thing.
But in the case of the specialized high schools, there is no criteria for anything except the test. What de Blasio is trying to do is basically an extreme form of affirmative action
You can debate whether or not diversity should be a goal in any elite institution. I had read somewhere that if admissions at elite universities were purely grades and test scores, the ivies would overwhelmingly female.
Is the somewhat balanced gender ratio a form of affirmative action?
Just curious what you think - do you think that diversity should be a goal in elite college admissions?
While I would like both black and Latino kids to do better in school, I definitely disagree that they need to be like Asian nerds to succeed. Most white kids don't even do the "Asian tiger kid" thing.
I have mixed feelings about leaving the schools test only because I don't think the test is either a good measure of intelligence or the ability to keep up with the work load.
You can debate whether or not diversity should be a goal in any elite institution. I had read somewhere that if admissions at elite universities were purely grades and test scores, the ivies would overwhelmingly female.
Is the somewhat balanced gender ratio a form of affirmative action?
Just curious what you think - do you think that diversity should be a goal in elite college admissions?
While I would like universities to be diverse, I don't think it should be their goal. I'm simply not in favor of holding any group to lower standards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yodel
I have mixed feelings about leaving the schools test only because I don't think the test is either a good measure of intelligence or the ability to keep up with the work load.
But de Blasio's plan requires that a student only be in the top 25% citywide, that would make the schools hardly specialized at that point.
While I would like universities to be diverse, I don't think it should be their goal. I'm simply not in favor of holding any group to lower standards.
But de Blasio's plan requires that a student only be in the top 25% citywide, that would make the schools hardly specialized at that point.
I would imagine that if all forms of preference were abolished at elite colleges, and the result was really low white male enrollment, there would be a lot of hell breaking loose.
I don't think it sounds like a bad system, but why not make more schools that have this criteria and keep the status quo too?
You can debate whether or not diversity should be a goal in any elite institution. I had read somewhere that if admissions at elite universities were purely grades and test scores, the ivies would overwhelmingly female.
Is the somewhat balanced gender ratio a form of affirmative action?
Just curious what you think - do you think that diversity should be a goal in elite college admissions?
It's been a goal for elite colleges for many years at this point. You can do some research on how admissions officers decide who gets to be in a freshman class. There are more than enough outstanding applicants from all backgrounds to make that happen. Yes, there are quotas, regional, gender, foreign applicants, legacy, specific schools. You can look up what "yield" means in college admissions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
