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.
No surprise here. Whites have always had and continue to have affirmative action. The problem with AA only arose when there was a program established for minorities. The same occurred with welfare. It was acceptable to whites when it was basically accessible to them alone.
No surprise here that you would display your bigotry by making things up about whites. The problem with AA arose right away in that it was a program that wasn't based on achievement. It was acceptable to those getting the handouts and those who believe that minorities are inferior so they need an un level playing field to compete.
No affirmative action for any race - 43% of whites at Harvard admitted because of athletics or children of donors
Hmmm ....
Doing a bit of quick research, one finds that:
Harvard's average SAT scores are 720 and 740, Math and English respectively.
93% of incoming students had a high school GPA of 3.75 or better.
Formidable requirements to be sure.
Harvard is around 42% White. Not a majority, but the largest demographic group there. The total undergraduate population is 6,788. So that is about 2,850 White undergraduates.
So if the OP is to be believed, 1,255 White undergrads were admitted because they are athletes or the children of donors and thus should not have made the cut.
One might suspect that such a large chunk of lackluster undergrads would drag Harvard's tough admissions criteria way down.
Unless a Harvard squash player receives the same considerations as a basketball player at University of North Carolina.
If academics were the main determinant for admission, then harvard would have a majority Asian student body and we wouldn't need Harvard's Asian quotas to keep Asian numbers down and maintain "diversity".
According to the model from the study, roughly 75% of white aldcs ( Athletes, Legacies, Dean's interest list students, Children of faculty, staff) would have been rejected for admission.
The Dean's interest list is a list of students whose parents donated to harvard.
I believe that college and university admissions should be based ONLY on SAT scores, and nothing else so long as a student has at least a 3.3 G.P.A. (because grades can often be inflated, and different teachers and high schools very often have different grade standards).
This means that I think, for example, that is a college or university has room for 7000 students for the freshman class, then the 9,000 applicants with the highest SAT scores should be offered admission (or however many "extra" above the 7,000 figure the college or university deems a reasonable number to allow for "turn-downs").
Last edited by katharsis; 10-05-2019 at 03:11 PM..
I believe that college and university admissions should be based ONLY on SAT scores, and nothing else so long as a student has at least a 3.3 G.P.A. (because grades can often be inflated, and different teachers and high schools very often have different grade standards).
This means that I think, for example, that is a college or university has room for 7000 students for the freshman class, then the 9,000 applicants with the highest SAT scores should be offered admission (or however many "extra" above the 7,000 figure the college or university deems a reasonable number to allow for "turn-downs").
No surprise here that you would display your bigotry by making things up about whites. The problem with AA arose right away in that it was a program that wasn't based on achievement. It was acceptable to those getting the handouts and those who believe that minorities are inferior so they need an un level playing field to compete.
Exactly wrong and you have no proof.
No bigotry at all and no one is making anything up. It’s a fact that whites have had their own affirmative action and handouts for years and years based on exclusionary laws and practices. Why is it so difficult to admit that? It was acceptable to them since they received the handouts. But when the tables were turned and laws and policies were enacted in efforts to level the playing field, many whites were and still are angry. They believe they need unlevel playing field to compete even after years of affirmative action.
Because -- as the title of this thread states and because certain other groups have an "edge", too -- colleges now have the ability to discriminate and/or show favoritism in whatever way they wish.
If academics were the main determinant for admission, then harvard would have a majority Asian student body and we wouldn't need Harvard's Asian quotas to keep Asian numbers down and maintain "diversity".
According to the model from the study, roughly 75% of white aldcs ( Athletes, Legacies, Dean's interest list students, Children of faculty, staff) would have been rejected for admission.
The Dean's interest list is a list of students whose parents donated to harvard.
The reason Harvard is Harvard and not say the University of Massachusetts is the endowment that allows it to have the best facilities and resources to attract the best researchers and allows it offer need blind admission to the most attractive students.
If Harvard didn't favor the legacies, especially the ones who donated, these people will just fund another school which would then become the next Harvard. Moreover, I don't see any evidence that Harvard is letting in the legacy students because they are specifically white, but rather its a combination of being wealthy and a history of donating to Harvard. A lot of the networking value of attending Harvard comes from the legacies. Bill Gates son likely has an advantage at getting a job at Microsoft. Jeff Bezos kids probably have similar advantages at Amazon and the Washington Post. One of the reasons kids from Stanford and Harvard end doing so many start ups is both that they are bright but also because know people who can introduce them to wealthy and powerful venture capitalists and investment bankers.
If academics were the main determinant for admission, then harvard would have a majority Asian student body and we wouldn't need Harvard's Asian quotas to keep Asian numbers down and maintain "diversity".
According to the model from the study, roughly 75% of white aldcs ( Athletes, Legacies, Dean's interest list students, Children of faculty, staff) would have been rejected for admission.
The Dean's interest list is a list of students whose parents donated to harvard.
Simply running the numbers indicates otherwise.
A few simple calculations indicates that the whites in question number around 20 % of the student body. That is a large chunk. You cannot insert that many students with substandard grades and test scores into Harvard without their admission requirements plummeting with subsequent damage to their ranking and reputation.
Harvard's rep and ranking are stellar.
Whites getting Affirmatve Action at Harvard or anywhere else is an idiotic notion in a country that is growing stupider by the day.
Rubes. All of you. Don't bother applying to Harvard.
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.
