I thought this is what people wanted with affirmative action. No?
where's the AA in this? Asians are not being told NO because there are more blacks/hispanics at these schools then asians. They are being told NO because this school would at least like to show some signs of diversity. It's not about being fair purely based on grades and scores. Sorry applicants. you know this already. So why would you complain about it?
And those who talk about a lack of fairness. Just remember, it can't be fair for you before its fair for blacks, then hispanics, so forth and so on, in that order. Since that's the level of discrimination you see in America when it comes to quality of education from elementary school to the university level, to the workplace.
What i'm saying is, everyone has a gripe. So which gripe's need to be addressed first are the people who have been treated the most unfair for the longest period of time. And we know who those people are. So in essence to my asian american brethren...get in line. We're all knocking on ringfingers door requesting a fairer situation.
Or institutions could do something ground breaking, like ignoring race all together and look at merit and socio-economic factors.
If you happen to be an Asian kid who happens to be from a poor family you're screwed. The system itself is telling you that you are less important than just about everyone else because of the color of your skin.
I thought this is what people wanted with affirmative action. No?
where's the AA in this? Asians are not being told NO because there are more blacks/hispanics at these schools then asians. They are being told NO because this school would at least like to show some signs of diversity. It's not about being fair purely based on grades and scores. Sorry applicants. you know this already. So why would you complain about it?
And those who talk about a lack of fairness. Just remember, it can't be fair for you before its fair for blacks, then hispanics, so forth and so on, in that order. Since that's the level of discrimination you see in America when it comes to quality of education from elementary school to the university level, to the workplace.
What i'm saying is, everyone has a gripe. So which gripe's need to be addressed first are the people who have been treated the most unfair for the longest period of time. And we know who those people are. So in essence to my asian american brethren...get in line. We're all knocking on ringfingers door requesting a fairer situation.
Or institutions could do something ground breaking, like ignoring race all together and look at merit and socio-economic factors.
If you happen to be an Asian kid who happens to be from a poor family you're screwed. The system itself is telling you that you are less important than just about everyone else because of the color of your skin.
There is so much compelling evidence that disproves your thesis about the effects of pervasive racism in America v. African Americans. You're just wrong in your statement factually. _________________ “It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays
The filing said that Harvard “uses a vague ‘personal rating’ that harms Asian-American applicants’ chances for admission and may be infected with racial bias; engages in unlawful racial balancing; and has never seriously considered race-neutral alternatives in its more than 45 years of using race to make admissions decisions.”
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Just saw the dates! My bad.
Affirmative action is a tricky subject. How do you uplift the underserved along with everyone else and not instead of someone else.
The focus should be at the start, pre-pre-K, pre-K, K-12 (not just free public schools but also govt funded after schools programs/extra-curricular and nutrition/health
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Just saw the dates! My bad.
Affirmative action is a tricky subject. How do you uplift the underserved along with everyone else and not instead of someone else.
The focus should be at the start, pre-pre-K, pre-K, K-12 (not just free public schools but also govt funded after schools programs/extra-curricular and nutrition/health
That's why, even as a minority, I have never been a fan of AA. It's fake leveling of the playing field and it results in an inferior "product". And you're right -- how can the Justice Dept say it's wrong to deny someone who is qualified because they are Asian, but ok to deny someone who is qualified because they are White? I think it's wrong to deny anyone of anything as a function of race no matter what that race is.
And I do agree with you. If people want more of a particular group in a particular profession, you start earlier and do the work to get that group interested and qualified. Then, you can accept on the pure basis of merit, which is where I think we all want to get to.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:04 pm Post subject:
lakersken80 wrote:
Not fair but I can understand why campuses would want a diverse student body.
but that is the question, although many ivy leagues schools seek diverse student bodies based on skin color, but sometimes those individuals are far more similar than they are different. If you have a Caucasian, African American, Latino and Asian student who all grew up going to private schools in the Northeast, all come from homes with educated and successful parents.....are they really that diverse? Is their world view going to be that different?
Not fair but I can understand why campuses would want a diverse student body.
but that is the question, although many ivy leagues schools seek diverse student bodies based on skin color, but sometimes those individuals are far more similar than they are different. If you have a Caucasian, African American, Latino and Asian student who all grew up going to private schools in the Northeast, all come from homes with educated and successful parents.....are they really that diverse? Is their world view going to be that different?
I'm not for affirmative action, I'm glad of this outcome. The UC's did away with this in 1996 with the passage of prop 209.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:29 pm Post subject:
lakersken80 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
Not fair but I can understand why campuses would want a diverse student body.
but that is the question, although many ivy leagues schools seek diverse student bodies based on skin color, but sometimes those individuals are far more similar than they are different. If you have a Caucasian, African American, Latino and Asian student who all grew up going to private schools in the Northeast, all come from homes with educated and successful parents.....are they really that diverse? Is their world view going to be that different?
I'm not for affirmative action, I'm glad of this outcome. The UC's did away with this in 1996 with the passage of prop 209.
I understand arguments for both sides....do not really have a clear personal position....but I think that the United States is a different place than it was when AA was introduced, and I think collective minds need to take a fresh look at where we are today. I doubt the optimal solution today is the same as it was in 1960, 1980 or even 2000. Maybe the conclusion is it is still needed....maybe a different version, or maybe not at all....but that conclusion has to based on the 2018 version of the United States.
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Curious what OL's opinion is now, because it was pretty ridiculous rhetoric back then and still is now.
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35812 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:00 am Post subject:
LAkers 4 Life wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
governator wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Curious what OL's opinion is now, because it was pretty ridiculous rhetoric back then and still is now.
So why not start capping the number of Jews too? Jews are 2% of the population and nearly 30% of the student body at Ivy League schools. This makes them nearly *four* times as overrepresented as Asian-Americans currently are and approximately twice as overrepresented as Asian-Americans would be without affirmative action.
Basically, you are either using a double standard or you believe in something which is blatantly anti-semitic. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Curious what OL's opinion is now, because it was pretty ridiculous rhetoric back then and still is now.
So why not start capping the number of Jews too? Jews are 2% of the population and nearly 30% of the student body at Ivy League schools. This makes them nearly *four* times as overrepresented as Asian-Americans currently are and approximately twice as overrepresented as Asian-Americans would be without affirmative action.
Basically, you are either using a double standard or you believe in something which is blatantly anti-semitic.
I agree. I meant OL's rhetorical question back then was asinine.
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Curious what OL's opinion is now, because it was pretty ridiculous rhetoric back then and still is now.
So why not start capping the number of Jews too? Jews are 2% of the population and nearly 30% of the student body at Ivy League schools. This makes them nearly *four* times as overrepresented as Asian-Americans currently are and approximately twice as overrepresented as Asian-Americans would be without affirmative action.
Basically, you are either using a double standard or you believe in something which is blatantly anti-semitic.
Maybe the applications have changed since I went to college, but when I did, I recall precisely zero of them asked about religion.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90306 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:46 am Post subject:
LAkers 4 Life wrote:
CandyCanes wrote:
LAkers 4 Life wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
governator wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Curious what OL's opinion is now, because it was pretty ridiculous rhetoric back then and still is now.
So why not start capping the number of Jews too? Jews are 2% of the population and nearly 30% of the student body at Ivy League schools. This makes them nearly *four* times as overrepresented as Asian-Americans currently are and approximately twice as overrepresented as Asian-Americans would be without affirmative action.
Basically, you are either using a double standard or you believe in something which is blatantly anti-semitic.
I agree. I meant OL's rhetorical question back then was asinine.
Perhaps because it was a trifle more Socratic than rhetorical? I was looking to provoke an answer that would lead to a deeper meditation on the already discriminatory nature of what makes a Harvard degree so valuable in the first place. But I lost track of the thread. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
If I have this correct, Asian students are being accepted to Harvard at a rate three and a half times their percentage of the population, and they are claiming discrimination?
Why do you say this Omar? Do you believe school, jobs should be quotas proportional to population percentage in the US?
To be fair, and I dunno if I should have just started a new thread, but OL said that over 3 yrs ago.
But yeah, I don’t think general population is a fair sample to consider. The general population doesn’t apply to Harvard. If anything, the fairer comparison would looking at the admittance rate of a population relative to the pool of qualified appicants. Those, IMO, should be close to aligned.
Curious what OL's opinion is now, because it was pretty ridiculous rhetoric back then and still is now.
So why not start capping the number of Jews too? Jews are 2% of the population and nearly 30% of the student body at Ivy League schools. This makes them nearly *four* times as overrepresented as Asian-Americans currently are and approximately twice as overrepresented as Asian-Americans would be without affirmative action.
Basically, you are either using a double standard or you believe in something which is blatantly anti-semitic.
I agree. I meant OL's rhetorical question back then was asinine.
Perhaps because it was a trifle more Socratic than rhetorical? I was looking to provoke an answer that would lead to a deeper meditation on the already discriminatory nature of what makes a Harvard degree so valuable in the first place. But I lost track of the thread.
Sorry, the age of the thread doesn't matter. Your motivation doesn't matter. You obviously need to be canceled. It's the rage you know.
Joined: 31 Jan 2002 Posts: 6879 Location: Los Angeles/Barcelona
Posted: Wed Oct 02, 2019 6:09 am Post subject:
My IQ has dropped considerably reading this thread. This is not all that complicated.
It's obvious there is discrimination going on here. The only debate is whether this is legal/illegal and the second one is if it's moral/immoral.
On the first question, it's probably legal. Harvard is a private organization and it can sort of do whatever it wants. They routinely admit people who are well connected with the university who would otherwise be ineligible. I think I'm fine with this.
The second question is a philosophical one. One poster mentioned that Asians get accepted into Harvard at 3.5x their portion of the general population, so they can't claim discrimination. Why can't they claim discrimination? Asians are getting accepted at a 3.5x rate due to merit alone and if someone is getting rejected because a lesser candidate is admitted to fulfill a quota, of course it's discrimination. To argue this point makes zero sense. You can only argue re: Harvard's right to do so in the first place. This is a matter of law and not philosophy.
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35812 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:18 am Post subject:
I think race should be used holistically in admissions. But if you think it's appropriate to just assume things about people based solely on their race, then you are a race essentialist. Should we start imposing quotas on Jews again too? They're overrepresented at a rate even higher than Asians. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
On the first question, it's probably legal. Harvard is a private organization and it can sort of do whatever it wants. They routinely admit people who are well connected with the university who would otherwise be ineligible. I think I'm fine with this.
Harvard takes federal money. I read (or more accurately read and skimmed) the 130 page opinion. By taking the federal money, Harvard became subject to constitutional constraints. The opinion is mind numbing, with long sections discussing various forms of statistical evidence and the convoluted way that Harvard processes applications.
While Harvard was vindicated in this case, it has nonetheless changed its admission process. Admissions officers who recruited this year’s freshman class were instructed (pdf, p.17) not to “take an applicant’s race or ethnicity into account in making any of the ratings other than the overall rating,” and told that for the overall rating the “consideration of race or ethnicity may be considered only as one factor among many.” The judge wrote that “Harvard perhaps should have instituted an explicit written policy stating which ratings could take race into account before 2018, but that error has now been remedied.”
The school also overhauled its personal rating criteria for the class of 2023, according to judge Burroughs, in an effort to correct what SFFA argued was a propensity of admissions officers to refer to Asian-American applicants as “quiet,” “hard worker, bright” but “bland ” “flat,” or “not exciting” in their evaluations. The new reading procedures encourage admissions officers to “consider qualities of character such as courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, leadership, maturity, genuineness, selflessness, humility, resiliency, judgment, citizenship, and spirit and camaraderie with peers.”
A new study notes that in the six admissions cycles between 2014 and 2019, 43% of white students admitted to Harvard were either legacies, recruited athletes, children of faculty and staff, or students on the Dean’s Interest List—a list of applicants whose relatives have donated to Harvard, the existence of which only became public knowledge in 2018. By contrast, no more than 16% of admitted students who were African-American, Asian-American, or Hispanic fell into one of those favored categories.
A new study notes that in the six admissions cycles between 2014 and 2019, 43% of white students admitted to Harvard were either legacies, recruited athletes, children of faculty and staff, or students on the Dean’s Interest List—a list of applicants whose relatives have donated to Harvard, the existence of which only became public knowledge in 2018. By contrast, no more than 16% of admitted students who were African-American, Asian-American, or Hispanic fell into one of those favored categories.
Someone posted another article about that study, either here or somewhere else. I looked at some of the study at the time and concluded that the article was not representing the study accurately. This article may be more accurate, but I don't have time to dive into it today.
A new study notes that in the six admissions cycles between 2014 and 2019, 43% of white students admitted to Harvard were either legacies, recruited athletes, children of faculty and staff, or students on the Dean’s Interest List—a list of applicants whose relatives have donated to Harvard, the existence of which only became public knowledge in 2018. By contrast, no more than 16% of admitted students who were African-American, Asian-American, or Hispanic fell into one of those favored categories.
Someone posted another article about that study, either here or somewhere else. I looked at some of the study at the time and concluded that the article was not representing the study accurately. This article may be more accurate, but I don't have time to dive into it today.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
