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.
Actually, deBalsio's plan is not entirely without regard to race. If anyone wants to challenge that (and I think there will be groups that will), they can certainly make a case that deBlasio's plan is very much based around race, under the false pretense of being fair for underperforming students.
Why would underperforming students not have the ability to understand that they couldn't and shouldn't be going to Harvard?
Harvard and elite schools in general have a unique role in shaping American society as many of their graduates will go on to have a disproportionate impact in business, academia, law, culture, politics, medicine, etc. With this in mind, I am not against the idea that elite schools make an effort to ensure individuals from under-represented/disadvantaged backgrounds are represented on campus and go on to use their education and perspective to shape the world we live in. If Havard wants to accept a Black female with notable accomplishments and an inner-city/rural background but scored 100 points less on the SAT than the average of other applicants, I'm all for that as can see the value she adds to the student body. However, when you look at the historical demographics of incoming classes, it indicates that quota based racial engineering may be at work. I'm firmly against quota based racial engineering, so I'm all for putting some sunlight on their admissions practices.
I don't see how the students can possibly win this lawsuit. Harvard's admission process is not just arithmetic. "OK, people, this year we are hiring 20% black students, 32% white students, 30% Asian students, and 18% mixed race/other." Harvays says they admit based on a variety of factors. Maybe the students don't get admitted for other reasons.
Harvard admits it tries to maintain a policy of inclusion when it comes to acceptance is being charged they are discriminating against Asians who are being accepted at a lower rate compared to other races.
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiffs it will set major precedent across the country such as NYC where DeBlasio is rolling out inclusion policies for specialized schools rather than go by academic records.
Is the Asian student % at Harvard really far below their % of the US population?
Harvard’s class of 2021 is 22.2 percent Asian-American
There are misconceptions about affirmative action.
White women benefit the most from affirmative action, not minorities
It is not only based on race.
Though the executive order President John F. Kennedy initially signed in 1961 made it unlawful to discriminate based on “race, creed, color, or national origin” for government contractors, in 1967 President Lyndon B. Johnson extended the policy to all employees nationwide and included sex and religion as well.
For more than five decades, affirmative action has sought to eliminate unlawful discrimination for all marginalized people.
A diverse population on campus helps all students gain a greater awareness of social issues, promotes a higher level of academic engagement and leads to an overall better college experience, as noted by the University of Arizona.Emily Choi, an Asian American student at Harvard, told the Times that the policy has made a positive impact on her experience at the Ivy League institution.
“I firmly believe in affirmative action,” she said. “The diversity at Harvard has been key to my learning, and I think that if there weren’t so many people of different backgrounds, I wouldn’t be forced to think about things in new ways.”
Opponents fail to realize that minorities, especially people of color, still face institutional disadvantages when it comes to being admitted to certain schools. And though race isn’t the only identifying factor in admission processes, people of color are often accused of being unqualified for high-performing school and taking white students’ places (even though Ivy League schools admit more legacy students than black students).
And though the candidates can gain access to education opportunities, affirmative action isn’t about a “quota,” preferential treatment or a free ride. Race, ethnicity, religion and sex are used in a holistic approach to consider what candidates would be a good fit for the school.
My hope is that Jewish overrepresentstion comes to light as well. Despite being less than 2%of our population they make up 25% of Harvard. They also hold numerous positions of power within the university such as the last three presidents and countless admissions officers. Interestingly enough the only group at Harvard (and other “top” schools) that is actually underrepresented are Christian whites. Perhaps all of this is correlated somehow...
All you have to figure out is this: Harvard University is using racial quotas that shut out high-scoring Asians. Is that racist?
Affirmative Action has always met the definition of racism (preferential treatment based upon race). But academia believes that while most racism is evil; their racism is good because it is trying to correct the evil racism that preceded it. If this gets to the Supreme Court there is a good chance that Affirmative Action is gone. The court may think ALL racism is evil....period.
For more than five decades, affirmative action has sought to eliminate unlawful discrimination for all marginalized people.
I was taught that two wrongs don't make a right. But even if we accept the premise that it's necessary to tip the scales to balance out past wrongs, this begs the question: for how long? When will it come to pass that affirmative action has accomplished its goal and now everyone is "even"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KayAnn246
Emily Choi, an Asian American student at Harvard, told the Times that the policy has made a positive impact on her experience at the Ivy League institution.
“I firmly believe in affirmative action,” she said. “The diversity at Harvard has been key to my learning, and I think that if there weren’t so many people of different backgrounds, I wouldn’t be forced to think about things in new ways.”
Emily Choi doesn't strike me as being all that smart, if she's only capable of learning if she's around people who don't look like her. And I'm willing to bet that the diversity that she praises is only skin deep; I doubt that there are too many Trump supporters, for example, among her fellow students.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KayAnn246
Opponents fail to realize that minorities, especially people of color, still face institutional disadvantages when it comes to being admitted to certain schools.
If being a "person of color" means that the threshold for admittance is lower than it is for a "person of non-color" (or whatever whites and Asians, collectively, are called), this would be an institutional advantage. So what are the disadvantages that they face?
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.
