NYTimes article on diversity in admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

It's gonna be a decline? I think we're ready for it.

Well if you just point blank hate black people, I guess it won't be that much of a shock or worth discussing...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Scenario 4 is the dream but, sadly, it has remained just that even after years of effort by very smart individuals and very motivated institutions.

Until that nut is cracked, all secondary schools should have to report average gpa to effectuate scenario 3; secondary school PSAT and SAT info is already known to all colleges.

Colleges have the GPA data from the high school counselor profile report.

[Anonymous]

Powerful!
Two things confused me:
*Why are Black and Hispanic groups grouped together? As in 10% of the imaginary, merit based pool are. The total population is 30%, not sure about student age. So I really have no idea how bad this is? Is it equally bad for each group?
*Low income group wasn’t segmented in any way. I’d like to know are wealthy races equally admitted? Are low income races equally not admitted? What about urban/rural? Public/private/magnet schools?

Data tells a story but I’m not 100% sure what that story is yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

It's gonna be a decline? I think we're ready for it.

Well if you just point blank hate black people, I guess it won't be that much of a shock or worth discussing...

No, it's more a matter of not taking people seriously who say "gonna". There's nothing much to discuss in that case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

It's gonna be a decline? I think we're ready for it.

Well if you just point blank hate black people, I guess it won't be that much of a shock or worth discussing...

No, it's more a matter of not taking people seriously who say "gonna". There's nothing much to discuss in that case.

Anything specific you found wrong with the analysis, or do you just have the extreme attachment to prescriptivist grammar typical of midwit schoolmarms?

[Anonymous]

This is all kinda silly because colleges are still looking at race directly via their essays asking students to discuss their unique backgrounds and experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

It's gonna be a decline? I think we're ready for it.

Well if you just point blank hate black people, I guess it won't be that much of a shock or worth discussing...

No, it's more a matter of not taking people seriously who say "gonna". There's nothing much to discuss in that case.

Anything specific you found wrong with the analysis, or do you just have the extreme attachment to prescriptivist grammar typical of midwit schoolmarms?

I commend your ability to generate effective insults

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

It's gonna be a decline? I think we're ready for it.

Well if you just point blank hate black people, I guess it won't be that much of a shock or worth discussing...

No, it's more a matter of not taking people seriously who say "gonna". There's nothing much to discuss in that case.

Anything specific you found wrong with the analysis, or do you just have the extreme attachment to prescriptivist grammar typical of midwit schoolmarms?

I think you're a white savior because you don't even use Black people. So who cares what you think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

Based on interviewing, this chasm exists after college as well. We get a ton of pressure to lower standards when hiring candidates to increase our diversity numbers.

At my job, the “diverse” employees have proven themselves better employees than the older white men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's telling that most of this thread is about side issues like "are Jews white?", "what are the demographics of the NYT comments section?", etc.

No one wants to discuss the fact that there are going to be a lot fewer URMs on T80 college campuses next fall. Neither supporters of AA nor opponents of it seem interested in this fact.

Weird.

It's obvious why the opponents don't care. Supporters likely believe that those might be compensated with lower income populations from all races, which might be less privileged than URMs from very wealthy families

Idk, before the decision ,opponents were telling us this was an important step forward to a color blind society. You'd think they'd be crowing about how we're closer to a meritocracy now that undeserving URMs have been shown the door. And supporters were telling us the sky would fall oi AA were abolished, but no one is acting like the sky is falling now. Basically no one wants to touch it.

It would be one thing if it was just ivies, which people hate, but this story is about the whole T80, which includes a lot of state flagships.

I think people - on both sides - are in denial about the size of the gaps that exist between URM students and whites/Asians. Not gaps, chasms.

They think it'll be a few less blacks here and there. But it's gonna be a 30% or more decline. If AOs really juke it. No one is ready for this.

Based on interviewing, this chasm exists after college as well. We get a ton of pressure to lower standards when hiring candidates to increase our diversity numbers.

At my job, the “diverse” employees have proven themselves better employees than the older white men.

Are they applying for the same jobs? Why isn't the comparison to same aged employees? I'm not sure age discrimination is better than racial discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:comments are largely negative. NYT readers have turned the corner on diversity measures, I guess.

NYT subscribers are pretty old now, right? The comments being negative doesn't shock me. Their reader base demos have to be a concern for the NYT.

No. Unless your consider 42 old. Their demos are enviable.

I’m always shocked when a link is posted here and someone says “paywall”. Who doesn’t subscribe to the NYT? I’m not always a fan, but can’t imagine not having access to the NYT.

https://gitnux.org/new-york-times-readership-statistics/

Do you work for the NYT?

I ask only because I know very few people who DO subscribe. I'm 33.

Everyone I know subscribes. Age group 35-50.

No one I know subscribes because it’s moved so far to the left

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:comments are largely negative. NYT readers have turned the corner on diversity measures, I guess.

NYT subscribers are pretty old now, right? The comments being negative doesn't shock me. Their reader base demos have to be a concern for the NYT.

No. Unless your consider 42 old. Their demos are enviable.

I’m always shocked when a link is posted here and someone says “paywall”. Who doesn’t subscribe to the NYT? I’m not always a fan, but can’t imagine not having access to the NYT.

https://gitnux.org/new-york-times-readership-statistics/

Do you work for the NYT?

I ask only because I know very few people who DO subscribe. I'm 33.

Everyone I know subscribes. Age group 35-50.

No one I know subscribes because it’s moved so far to the left

I have a couple of friends who work a the Times. At some tiers, it is filled with people who grew up with red politics in the household. This does influence what they write about and how.
Since my late 20s I stopped reading the NYT and, instead, it's the Financial Times or WSJ for me. Market moves resist political spin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:comments are largely negative. NYT readers have turned the corner on diversity measures, I guess.

NYT subscribers are pretty old now, right? The comments being negative doesn't shock me. Their reader base demos have to be a concern for the NYT.

No. Unless your consider 42 old. Their demos are enviable.

I’m always shocked when a link is posted here and someone says “paywall”. Who doesn’t subscribe to the NYT? I’m not always a fan, but can’t imagine not having access to the NYT.

https://gitnux.org/new-york-times-readership-statistics/

Do you work for the NYT?

I ask only because I know very few people who DO subscribe. I'm 33.

Everyone I know subscribes. Age group 35-50.

No one I know subscribes because it’s moved so far to the left

+1
I always laugh when people like one of the PPs expresses shock that someone might *not* subscribe to the NYT. Seriously? We were longtime subscribers to the WaPo and watched as it moved further and further left. Same with the NYT. Ended those and now subscribe to the WSJ. So, so much better in every way.

This site really is a liberal echo chamber.

[Anonymous]

And your just another corporate stooge who got yours and doesn’t give an F about anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:comments are largely negative. NYT readers have turned the corner on diversity measures, I guess.

NYT subscribers are pretty old now, right? The comments being negative doesn't shock me. Their reader base demos have to be a concern for the NYT.

No. Unless your consider 42 old. Their demos are enviable.

I’m always shocked when a link is posted here and someone says “paywall”. Who doesn’t subscribe to the NYT? I’m not always a fan, but can’t imagine not having access to the NYT.

https://gitnux.org/new-york-times-readership-statistics/

Do you work for the NYT?

I ask only because I know very few people who DO subscribe. I'm 33.

Knowledge is power my love. I know very few people your age who read the news, period. They miss out.