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.
It's already true in the sciences at the graduate level, which is focused on research and test scores more than creating a cohesive, diverse class with varying backgrounds and interests.
When's the last time you visited an elite college's admissions office? What access to SEM data do you have? I'm just commenting on what the data at the university I work for tells me and what I've heard anecdotally from colleagues at Harvard, Cornell, Yale, and MIT.
What we've found, however, is that the large number of Chinese students whose parents not only spent a lot of money to send them to the US but also a lot of money on test prep often lack the ability to express themselves in a classroom environment. School English vs. real-time English so to speak. Chinese high schools are also less focused on critical thinking than US schools, which is not always well matched to the US college experience. That is why college admissions is generally holistic rather than focusing on just test scores and GPA (which can range dramatically depending on the school - a 4.0 at one school might be a 3.0 at another). There's a lot more to admissions than the hard data points that determine "merit."
I don't have an issue with Chinese-American students being a bulk of a class based on merit. I do think universities should further limit the amount of Chinese (and all other) foreign students. If the universities are padding their bank accounts with foreign student $ then that is not fair to US students who might have gotten in otherwise. We should be educating our own citizens rather than allowing foreigners to use the system that US taxpayers fund.
The premise of the question is a false dichotomy. I know what someone is going to frame it - universities practicing affirmative action is discriminatory, while it's wrong to make a private company offer their goods to services to someone they don't want to sell to (e.g. LGBTQ people).
This is an intellectually dishonest question that is posed in bad faith.
Obviously, the OP was referencing affirmative action, which is legal and is not a form of discrimination.
Aside from academic performance, admissions officials take a myriad of factors into consideration when accepting students. including geography, writing sample, interview, personal accomplishments, hardships, and achievements.
If they did not, every Ivy, and other elite colleges would be filled with the sons and daughters of professionals and business professionals, who were coached in standardized test skills (SAT ACT) since 10th grade, are legacies and are not in need of financial aid.
Most would be graduates of prep schools or elite suburban school districts.
And yes, most would be white.
This is what the anti-affirmative action crowd seeks to return to - in college admission and in society in general. And, it is aberrant.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess
Everyone should be allowed to discriminate on their own terms.
Forcing someone to discriminate on your own terms is ludicrous.
you have every right to that opinion.
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.
