Race in college admissions is back in front of the Supreme Court Oral Argument on Oct. 31 (Monday)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bwahahaha. Let me tell you, my kid got asked for his scores when applying for an Oliver Wyman internship.

Doubt it. But whatever.

You must not be familiar with Oliver Wyman. That’s okay.

+1 not surprising at Oliver Wyman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If this is waht some people look at Math and English, we got a problem.

You have not spent enough time on dcum. Read some of the private school threads about how much better, stronger, more rigorous, more advantageous, is the education available to private school kids. The entire argument is that kids should go because they will be by far best prepared to " climb the tree".

My Asian kids went to overcrowded public schools of course because I don't have money to send them to private schools.
I believe tests are still the most objective and fair measure.
The world is never going to be perfectly fair and leveled. Welcome to the real world.

Of course not. But if the fish makes it to the first branch, that is as or more impressive than the monkey getting all the way to the top

Impressive doesn't mean qualified.
Help the fish equiped to compete is the solution.

Going to an excellent college is helping the fish to compete.

And it's helping the monkeys at the college as well if you believe it advantageous to work with monkeys and fish and elephants etc. To be well educated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope that the downfall of AA will support the current shift in enrollment from white institutions to HBCUs. Black students have options (formed by necessity) so they will be fine.

I thought diversity was important.
Why would you go to a school with 80+% of the same race.

Important to who? It's not at all important to me. I get nothing out of it. In fact it imposes significant costs on me.

I would go to school "with 80+% of the same race" because school is about learning not about being around other races.

Yes, school is about learning, but much of the learning that school is about takes place outside of the classroom. Students learn a lot from their fellow students; they learn many things that will be important to take forward into their adult lives.

College admissions officers know this. That is why they want to put together diverse classes where all the students can learn different lessons from each other.

Nebulous concept.
Please share the long-term studies with statistics (GPA, GRE/LSAT/MCAT scores, postgraduate study acceptance rates, graduation rates, avg starting salaries, etc.) proving "diverse" classes foster a climate of success for ALL students.

Why not provide a study that shows it doesn’t?

+1 Anyone who's attended college in this country and has an open mind knows that we all benefit from learning in a diverse environment. Those who've gone in other countries where 95%+ of the students are of one race have no clue what the value is.

Where’s the data? Where are the studies? Explain the “value” to the successful STEM students in the PRC who end up here.

It's usually the people who majored in some useless easy stuff and cruised in college say those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If this is waht some people look at Math and English, we got a problem.

You have not spent enough time on dcum. Read some of the private school threads about how much better, stronger, more rigorous, more advantageous, is the education available to private school kids. The entire argument is that kids should go because they will be by far best prepared to " climb the tree".

My Asian kids went to overcrowded public schools of course because I don't have money to send them to private schools.
I believe tests are still the most objective and fair measure.
The world is never going to be perfectly fair and leveled. Welcome to the real world.

Of course not. But if the fish makes it to the first branch, that is as or more impressive than the monkey getting all the way to the top

Impressive doesn't mean qualified.
Help the fish equiped to compete is the solution.

Going to an excellent college is helping the fish to compete.

shoving in underqualifed fish on top of the tree is not the solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope that the downfall of AA will support the current shift in enrollment from white institutions to HBCUs. Black students have options (formed by necessity) so they will be fine.

I thought diversity was important.
Why would you go to a school with 80+% of the same race.

Important to who? It's not at all important to me. I get nothing out of it. In fact it imposes significant costs on me.

I would go to school "with 80+% of the same race" because school is about learning not about being around other races.

Yes, school is about learning, but much of the learning that school is about takes place outside of the classroom. Students learn a lot from their fellow students; they learn many things that will be important to take forward into their adult lives.

College admissions officers know this. That is why they want to put together diverse classes where all the students can learn different lessons from each other.

Nebulous concept.
Please share the long-term studies with statistics (GPA, GRE/LSAT/MCAT scores, postgraduate study acceptance rates, graduation rates, avg starting salaries, etc.) proving "diverse" classes foster a climate of success for ALL students.

Why not provide a study that shows it doesn’t?

+1 Anyone who's attended college in this country and has an open mind knows that we all benefit from learning in a diverse environment. Those who've gone in other countries where 95%+ of the students are of one race have no clue what the value is.

Where’s the data? Where are the studies? Explain the “value” to the successful STEM students in the PRC who end up here.

It's usually the people who majored in some useless easy stuff and cruised in college say those.

Certainly no one with an under qualified lab partner in a class they needed for grad school would ever say that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We get that is the argument, but what is the solution that is more fair? I see both ways but tests are at least somewhat objective. And I have been on BOTH sides of the aisle here, growing up poor, first gen, no test prep options vs. what I can now offer my kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If this is waht some people look at Math and English, we got a problem.

You have not spent enough time on dcum. Read some of the private school threads about how much better, stronger, more rigorous, more advantageous, is the education available to private school kids. The entire argument is that kids should go because they will be by far best prepared to " climb the tree".

My Asian kids went to overcrowded public schools of course because I don't have money to send them to private schools.
I believe tests are still the most objective and fair measure.
The world is never going to be perfectly fair and leveled. Welcome to the real world.

Of course not. But if the fish makes it to the first branch, that is as or more impressive than the monkey getting all the way to the top

Impressive doesn't mean qualified.
Help the fish equiped to compete is the solution.

Going to an excellent college is helping the fish to compete.

Sure there are many many excellent colleges, and the fish can go to one of the excellent colleges at its level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope that the downfall of AA will support the current shift in enrollment from white institutions to HBCUs. Black students have options (formed by necessity) so they will be fine.

I thought diversity was important.
Why would you go to a school with 80+% of the same race.

Important to who? It's not at all important to me. I get nothing out of it. In fact it imposes significant costs on me.

I would go to school "with 80+% of the same race" because school is about learning not about being around other races.

Yes, school is about learning, but much of the learning that school is about takes place outside of the classroom. Students learn a lot from their fellow students; they learn many things that will be important to take forward into their adult lives.

College admissions officers know this. That is why they want to put together diverse classes where all the students can learn different lessons from each other.

Nebulous concept.
Please share the long-term studies with statistics (GPA, GRE/LSAT/MCAT scores, postgraduate study acceptance rates, graduation rates, avg starting salaries, etc.) proving "diverse" classes foster a climate of success for ALL students.

Why not provide a study that shows it doesn’t?

+1 Anyone who's attended college in this country and has an open mind knows that we all benefit from learning in a diverse environment. Those who've gone in other countries where 95%+ of the students are of one race have no clue what the value is.

Where’s the data? Where are the studies? Explain the “value” to the successful STEM students in the PRC who end up here.

It's usually the people who majored in some useless easy stuff and cruised in college say those.

Certainly no one with an under qualified lab partner in a class they needed for grad school would ever say that

Underqualified is not your call. That belongs to the adcom. Maybe the arrogant asshat that thinks she's God's gift to the lab is the less desirable admit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has 6.56% Black students
Yale has 6.53% Black students
Princeton has 10% Black students (undergrad)

Can someone please explain to me how this is unacceptable to folks? Would y'all prefer those percentages be 0%??


https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university#:~:text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20Harvard%20University%20is%2039.7%25%20White,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/yale-university
https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

Why don't you study and work hard if you want to get into elite colleges? You think some people should have guaranteed seats?Isn't it common sense?

Many people study and work hard and get into elite schools.

Then other people get mad, take their SAT score and create lawsuits to say those people did not belong in an elite college based solely on their SAT score.

Why do these people assume they should get the seat instead?

Wrong again.
Nothing was ever based solely on SAT score.

Frankly, nothing should be based on SAT scores. It's a billion dollar industry racket.

And it's basically guaranteed this won't be the case due to test-optional.

DP.. here's the thing. Grading is not an accurate picture of achievement, either, since grades can be inflated.

So, what academic metric should be used for admissions to an academic institution?

You keep referring to “academic institution[s]” as though that is all they are. They are more than simply academic institutions. College isn’t only about academics in the US, it is about much more than that.

I think this is why some posters have trouble with the concept of college admissions here: they mistakenly believe that it is supposed to be about academics and only academics.

I think you did not read the "DP" part.

In any case, colleges may be more than just about academics, but its primary purpose is academics and education. Otherwise it wouldn't be categorized as such with the IRS -- " educational institution ".

It also wouldn't hand out grades if it wasn't about academics.

There’s a lot that goes into educating young people that is outside classroom academics. Undergrad colleges here are as much about the outside the classroom aspects as they are about inside the classroom.

You can see it however you want it, but according to the IRS, colleges are academic institutions, and education is their primary goal. What you are referring to is just fluff. I'm not spending thousands of dollars for my kid to just have fun outside the classroom. The primary reason for going to college is to further their education, not "experience outside the classroom" fluff which is secondary.

Thankfully, you shouldn't worry about an expensive selective school if student learning is your sole goal. A community college teacher likely cares a lot more about your student's learning than a top prof who is there to research and has little choice but to teach.

so elite colleges goal isn't about teaching and educating? The IRS needs to revoke their status then.

If a top prof is about research and not teaching, then why does anyone who cares about their kids higher education want their kid to go to such a school? Are you saying people who want affirmative action in education don't care about the student's education, and only about the experience outside the class?

Newsflash, education also happens outside the classroom! If you don't already know this, then thoughts and prayers.

then why do academic institutions care about the student's GPA?

What is college teaching kids outside the classroom, other than being an adult, living on your own, that they can't get experience from elsewhere? What unique "education" are colleges teaching outside the classroom?

The college isn't 'teaching' anything. They lay the groundwork by providing a diverse community, and it happens organically. You can get the in-the-classroom learning elsewhere, too, but there's significant advantage to having learned things both in and out of the classroom before going into the workplace. Employers don't want people coming in fresh from college who don't have any clue how to interact with different kinds of people and situations.

Diversity is a good thing for colleges but not a must thing to violate the Constitution of the US. Academia is a must thing.

Selecting for diversity does not violate the Constitution. Excluding in order to NOT be diverse is. If AA is disallowed in college admissions, colleges will continue to seek out people from all backgrounds (sans quotas), someone will probably sue because they think they're missing out, and they'll lose.

You and I are not Supreme Court judges, so we'll see about that.

Too bad we don’t have a legit SCOTUS who will rule on this.

If they judge in favor of your liking = legit
If they judge against your liking = bad

And then these same people also make fun of Trump.

Um, no. It's taking up controversial, long simmering issues and then making broad, sweeping NEW law and disregarding 50 years of precedent (e.g., Roe) just b/c they can. And the opinions are activist in tone. THey are going against legal standards (stare decisis) and the norms of the court. That is why they are not legit.

This is not a BoTh sIDes issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has 6.56% Black students
Yale has 6.53% Black students
Princeton has 10% Black students (undergrad)

Can someone please explain to me how this is unacceptable to folks? Would y'all prefer those percentages be 0%??


https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university#:~:text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20Harvard%20University%20is%2039.7%25%20White,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/yale-university
https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

I honestly don't care whether those student bodies are 30% black or 3% black, so long as the admissions factors are race-neutral. I don't want a college excluding or including anyone because of the color of their skin.

Most people who say this mean they want a way to game admissions in their favor. The last thing they want is a fair process.

Nothing in elite private college admissions is "fair."

They are the "sellers" here and will pick whomever they want to shape a class.

The North Carolina portion of the case is the much more important part. State schools don't have the resources to carefully curate a class- they have to be formulaic. Eliminating race from the formula will change the composition of the student body. Cal is just now getting back to where they were prior to AA being banned in California and they are spending a fortune to get there. States where it is banned that haven't gone that route have see African American enrollment plummet. Do you really think the NC legislature will let UNC do the spend? What about Wisconsin or Ohio?

Good point/ questions.

UNC which was founded in 1789 didn't admit blacks at Chapel Hill until 1954 ( Brown vs Board of Education), so blacks were shut out for generations. Blacks are 22% of the North Carolina population, but are 8% of UNC Chapel Hill student population.

Ohio black population to Ohio State is 12% vs 7%.

The University of Wisconsin' s black percentage has consistently been below 3% for years.

The numbers will probably drop 2 percent or so. Wisconsin numbers are already pretty low.

I think UVA will drop a little.

However, I think a school like UMD College Park will maintain its diversity numbers, particularly for blacks.

This might raise other issues. If, like 40 years ago, particularly in states with large minority populations, minority tax payers are supporting state universities that enroll only tiny numbers of minority students, would that be grounds for a class action suit?
I’m not asking how the current Supreme Court might handle it — just if there would be grounds.
I’m thinking about UNC Chapel Hill. I’m also wondering if a good counter argument would be that other UNC schools are available and students who want spots will get them somewhere in the UNC system.

I grew up in DC and went to college out of state — so I’m not familiar with the ways that state systems of higher education work.

Don’t think you would want to take that tack. Based on tax returns, blacks in the US contribute significantly less in taxes vs. the cost of services they receive, so in actuality minority tax payers probably didn’t support state universities. I don’t think access to things like public education should be proportional to taxes paid.

I didn’t use the word “proportional “ — you did, so that’s your “tack”, not mine. I simply said that a people who are required to pay taxes are — are being excluded from a resource that is supported by taxes. It stands out to me too, that as the group is delineated by race, it’s really been less than 50 years of access to this resource in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has 6.56% Black students
Yale has 6.53% Black students
Princeton has 10% Black students (undergrad)

Can someone please explain to me how this is unacceptable to folks? Would y'all prefer those percentages be 0%??


https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university#:~:text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20Harvard%20University%20is%2039.7%25%20White,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/yale-university
https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

Why don't you study and work hard if you want to get into elite colleges? You think some people should have guaranteed seats?Isn't it common sense?

Many people study and work hard and get into elite schools.

Then other people get mad, take their SAT score and create lawsuits to say those people did not belong in an elite college based solely on their SAT score.

Why do these people assume they should get the seat instead?

Wrong again.
Nothing was ever based solely on SAT score.

Frankly, nothing should be based on SAT scores. It's a billion dollar industry racket.

And it's basically guaranteed this won't be the case due to test-optional.

DP.. here's the thing. Grading is not an accurate picture of achievement, either, since grades can be inflated.

So, what academic metric should be used for admissions to an academic institution?

You keep referring to “academic institution[s]” as though that is all they are. They are more than simply academic institutions. College isn’t only about academics in the US, it is about much more than that.

I think this is why some posters have trouble with the concept of college admissions here: they mistakenly believe that it is supposed to be about academics and only academics.

I think you did not read the "DP" part.

In any case, colleges may be more than just about academics, but its primary purpose is academics and education. Otherwise it wouldn't be categorized as such with the IRS -- " educational institution ".

It also wouldn't hand out grades if it wasn't about academics.

There’s a lot that goes into educating young people that is outside classroom academics. Undergrad colleges here are as much about the outside the classroom aspects as they are about inside the classroom.

You can see it however you want it, but according to the IRS, colleges are academic institutions, and education is their primary goal. What you are referring to is just fluff. I'm not spending thousands of dollars for my kid to just have fun outside the classroom. The primary reason for going to college is to further their education, not "experience outside the classroom" fluff which is secondary.

Thankfully, you shouldn't worry about an expensive selective school if student learning is your sole goal. A community college teacher likely cares a lot more about your student's learning than a top prof who is there to research and has little choice but to teach.

so elite colleges goal isn't about teaching and educating? The IRS needs to revoke their status then.

If a top prof is about research and not teaching, then why does anyone who cares about their kids higher education want their kid to go to such a school? Are you saying people who want affirmative action in education don't care about the student's education, and only about the experience outside the class?

Newsflash, education also happens outside the classroom! If you don't already know this, then thoughts and prayers.

then why do academic institutions care about the student's GPA?

What is college teaching kids outside the classroom, other than being an adult, living on your own, that they can't get experience from elsewhere? What unique "education" are colleges teaching outside the classroom?

The college isn't 'teaching' anything. They lay the groundwork by providing a diverse community, and it happens organically. You can get the in-the-classroom learning elsewhere, too, but there's significant advantage to having learned things both in and out of the classroom before going into the workplace. Employers don't want people coming in fresh from college who don't have any clue how to interact with different kinds of people and situations.

Diversity is a good thing for colleges but not a must thing to violate the Constitution of the US. Academia is a must thing.

Selecting for diversity does not violate the Constitution. Excluding in order to NOT be diverse is. If AA is disallowed in college admissions, colleges will continue to seek out people from all backgrounds (sans quotas), someone will probably sue because they think they're missing out, and they'll lose.

You and I are not Supreme Court judges, so we'll see about that.

Too bad we don’t have a legit SCOTUS who will rule on this.

DP — So true! And that’s now on top of a Senate that doesn’t really represent the voting population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has 6.56% Black students
Yale has 6.53% Black students
Princeton has 10% Black students (undergrad)

Can someone please explain to me how this is unacceptable to folks? Would y'all prefer those percentages be 0%??


https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university#:~:text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20Harvard%20University%20is%2039.7%25%20White,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/yale-university
https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

I honestly don't care whether those student bodies are 30% black or 3% black, so long as the admissions factors are race-neutral. I don't want a college excluding or including anyone because of the color of their skin.

Most people who say this mean they want a way to game admissions in their favor. The last thing they want is a fair process.

Nothing in elite private college admissions is "fair."

They are the "sellers" here and will pick whomever they want to shape a class.

The North Carolina portion of the case is the much more important part. State schools don't have the resources to carefully curate a class- they have to be formulaic. Eliminating race from the formula will change the composition of the student body. Cal is just now getting back to where they were prior to AA being banned in California and they are spending a fortune to get there. States where it is banned that haven't gone that route have see African American enrollment plummet. Do you really think the NC legislature will let UNC do the spend? What about Wisconsin or Ohio?

Good point/ questions.

UNC which was founded in 1789 didn't admit blacks at Chapel Hill until 1954 ( Brown vs Board of Education), so blacks were shut out for generations. Blacks are 22% of the North Carolina population, but are 8% of UNC Chapel Hill student population.

Ohio black population to Ohio State is 12% vs 7%.

The University of Wisconsin' s black percentage has consistently been below 3% for years.

The numbers will probably drop 2 percent or so. Wisconsin numbers are already pretty low.

I think UVA will drop a little.

However, I think a school like UMD College Park will maintain its diversity numbers, particularly for blacks.

This might raise other issues. If, like 40 years ago, particularly in states with large minority populations, minority tax payers are supporting state universities that enroll only tiny numbers of minority students, would that be grounds for a class action suit?
I’m not asking how the current Supreme Court might handle it — just if there would be grounds.
I’m thinking about UNC Chapel Hill. I’m also wondering if a good counter argument would be that other UNC schools are available and students who want spots will get them somewhere in the UNC system.

I grew up in DC and went to college out of state — so I’m not familiar with the ways that state systems of higher education work.

So you want to add up the taxes paid and see the proportion?

No. Again, I never said anything about “proportion “. If you want to introduce that as a concern, that’s your issue not mine. I guess you have little interest in addressing the question as I posed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has 6.56% Black students
Yale has 6.53% Black students
Princeton has 10% Black students (undergrad)

Can someone please explain to me how this is unacceptable to folks? Would y'all prefer those percentages be 0%??


https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university#:~:text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20Harvard%20University%20is%2039.7%25%20White,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/yale-university
https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

I honestly don't care whether those student bodies are 30% black or 3% black, so long as the admissions factors are race-neutral. I don't want a college excluding or including anyone because of the color of their skin.

Most people who say this mean they want a way to game admissions in their favor. The last thing they want is a fair process.

Nothing in elite private college admissions is "fair."

They are the "sellers" here and will pick whomever they want to shape a class.

The North Carolina portion of the case is the much more important part. State schools don't have the resources to carefully curate a class- they have to be formulaic. Eliminating race from the formula will change the composition of the student body. Cal is just now getting back to where they were prior to AA being banned in California and they are spending a fortune to get there. States where it is banned that haven't gone that route have see African American enrollment plummet. Do you really think the NC legislature will let UNC do the spend? What about Wisconsin or Ohio?

Good point/ questions.

UNC which was founded in 1789 didn't admit blacks at Chapel Hill until 1954 ( Brown vs Board of Education), so blacks were shut out for generations. Blacks are 22% of the North Carolina population, but are 8% of UNC Chapel Hill student population.

Ohio black population to Ohio State is 12% vs 7%.

The University of Wisconsin' s black percentage has consistently been below 3% for years.

The numbers will probably drop 2 percent or so. Wisconsin numbers are already pretty low.

I think UVA will drop a little.

However, I think a school like UMD College Park will maintain its diversity numbers, particularly for blacks.

This might raise other issues. If, like 40 years ago, particularly in states with large minority populations, minority tax payers are supporting state universities that enroll only tiny numbers of minority students, would that be grounds for a class action suit?
I’m not asking how the current Supreme Court might handle it — just if there would be grounds.
I’m thinking about UNC Chapel Hill. I’m also wondering if a good counter argument would be that other UNC schools are available and students who want spots will get them somewhere in the UNC system.

I grew up in DC and went to college out of state — so I’m not familiar with the ways that state systems of higher education work.

Don’t think you would want to take that tack. Based on tax returns, blacks in the US contribute significantly less in taxes vs. the cost of services they receive, so in actuality minority tax payers probably didn’t support state universities. I don’t think access to things like public education should be proportional to taxes paid.

I didn’t use the word “proportional “ — you did, so that’s your “tack”, not mine. I simply said that a people who are required to pay taxes are — are being excluded from a resource that is supported by taxes. It stands out to me too, that as the group is delineated by race, it’s really been less than 50 years of access to this resource in the first place.

There are 74 public colleges and universities in North Carolina, so I bet all tax payers can go to one of the colleges that they are qualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If this is waht some people look at Math and English, we got a problem.

You have not spent enough time on dcum. Read some of the private school threads about how much better, stronger, more rigorous, more advantageous, is the education available to private school kids. The entire argument is that kids should go because they will be by far best prepared to " climb the tree".

My Asian kids went to overcrowded public schools of course because I don't have money to send them to private schools.
I believe tests are still the most objective and fair measure.
The world is never going to be perfectly fair and leveled. Welcome to the real world.

Of course not. But if the fish makes it to the first branch, that is as or more impressive than the monkey getting all the way to the top

Impressive doesn't mean qualified.
Help the fish equiped to compete is the solution.

Going to an excellent college is helping the fish to compete.

shoving in underqualifed fish on top of the tree is not the solution.

That’s the fallacy. This fish is plenty qualified. Nobody is choosing anyone unqualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard has 6.56% Black students
Yale has 6.53% Black students
Princeton has 10% Black students (undergrad)

Can someone please explain to me how this is unacceptable to folks? Would y'all prefer those percentages be 0%??


https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university#:~:text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20Harvard%20University%20is%2039.7%25%20White,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/yale-university
https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

Why don't you study and work hard if you want to get into elite colleges? You think some people should have guaranteed seats?Isn't it common sense?

Many people study and work hard and get into elite schools.

Then other people get mad, take their SAT score and create lawsuits to say those people did not belong in an elite college based solely on their SAT score.

Why do these people assume they should get the seat instead?

Wrong again.
Nothing was ever based solely on SAT score.

Frankly, nothing should be based on SAT scores. It's a billion dollar industry racket.

And it's basically guaranteed this won't be the case due to test-optional.

DP.. here's the thing. Grading is not an accurate picture of achievement, either, since grades can be inflated.

So, what academic metric should be used for admissions to an academic institution?

You keep referring to “academic institution[s]” as though that is all they are. They are more than simply academic institutions. College isn’t only about academics in the US, it is about much more than that.

I think this is why some posters have trouble with the concept of college admissions here: they mistakenly believe that it is supposed to be about academics and only academics.

I think you did not read the "DP" part.

In any case, colleges may be more than just about academics, but its primary purpose is academics and education. Otherwise it wouldn't be categorized as such with the IRS -- " educational institution ".

It also wouldn't hand out grades if it wasn't about academics.

There’s a lot that goes into educating young people that is outside classroom academics. Undergrad colleges here are as much about the outside the classroom aspects as they are about inside the classroom.

You can see it however you want it, but according to the IRS, colleges are academic institutions, and education is their primary goal. What you are referring to is just fluff. I'm not spending thousands of dollars for my kid to just have fun outside the classroom. The primary reason for going to college is to further their education, not "experience outside the classroom" fluff which is secondary.

It seems like you need to find a college for your kid that aligns with those views. Good luck

Seems like you have no argument against what I stated, that these institutions are primarily about education and academia, and therefore, it makes sense to use some academic metric when looking at admissions. Otherwise, why would they still want to see the GPA? Why not just go with an essay, and extra curricular, all non academic activities of colleges here are "much about the outside the classroom aspects "?

BTW, are you assuming I am not an American, educated in the US?

They aren't primarily about academia. If you look at what they say, it's usually some version of creating/moulding better leaders/citizens

Why are you making up total bullcrap LOL

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University

"University (from Latin universitas 'a whole') is an institution of higher (or tertiary) education and research which awards academic degrees in several academic disciplines."

Harvards mission statement: The mission of Harvard College is to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders for our society.

Unc’s mission statement: We embrace an unwavering commitment to excellence as one of the world's great research universities. Our mission is to serve as a center for research, scholarship, and creativity and to teach a diverse community of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students to become the next generation of leaders.

Sorry it's not the marketting slogans that determine what they are.

Say you have never worked in business without saying you have never worked...