So what is changing? Questions about SC affirmative action decision

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's such a complex issue.
I wrestle with how to remedy systemic poverty, inequities in the delivery and quality of education, provide the many kinds of social supports that taxpayers would support if they are effective. Yet I don't know the best way to do that.
Something that will change is that privileged majority families like ours will not be able to blame other people for "taking their spot", something I've heard a lot in the past couple of admissions cycles. The process is hard but it felt wrong to see the finger pointing.

This excuse was really I reapplied, I agree.

[Anonymous]

The hard reality is that black and Hispanic admissions are going to suffer. All the evidence from colleges who have already dropped “the box” show this. The box gave schools an easy, systematic way to fulfill the diversity goal. Everything else is a proxy or doesn’t scale (essays). At schools with tens of thousands of applications, it’s going to be almost impossible not to forego some black and Hispanic admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The hard reality is that black and Hispanic admissions are going to suffer. All the evidence from colleges who have already dropped “the box” show this. The box gave schools an easy, systematic way to fulfill the diversity goal. Everything else is a proxy or doesn’t scale (essays). At schools with tens of thousands of applications, it’s going to be almost impossible not to forego some black and Hispanic admissions.

Cal tried to keep of URM numbers because California is one of the most liberal states in the country and they had the support of the their board and the state government. The reality is that most public schools will not even try. . They will comply with the law and with whatever direction they are given by their legal departments. Some private schools may try to skirt the law, but I wouldn't expect Michigan or UNC to do the same

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The hard reality is that black and Hispanic admissions are going to suffer. All the evidence from colleges who have already dropped “the box” show this. The box gave schools an easy, systematic way to fulfill the diversity goal. Everything else is a proxy or doesn’t scale (essays). At schools with tens of thousands of applications, it’s going to be almost impossible not to forego some black and Hispanic admissions.

Cal tried to keep of URM numbers because California is one of the most liberal states in the country and they had the support of the their board and the state government. The reality is that most public schools will not even try. . They will comply with the law and with whatever direction they are given by their legal departments. Some private schools may try to skirt the law, but I wouldn't expect Michigan or UNC to do the same

Skirting the law is not the appropriate way to describe this--it's following what the majority opinion explicitly and directly said is central to their opinion. I agree they may have a hard time recruiting and admitting diverse populations (UC system shows for instance that many admitted Black students do not want to attend because of lack of diversity which amplifies the issue). Public schools in highly segregated states however (like UNC) might be able to adopt a geographical formula for in-state applications--top x percent of students from each school admitted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The hard reality is that black and Hispanic admissions are going to suffer. All the evidence from colleges who have already dropped “the box” show this. The box gave schools an easy, systematic way to fulfill the diversity goal. Everything else is a proxy or doesn’t scale (essays). At schools with tens of thousands of applications, it’s going to be almost impossible not to forego some black and Hispanic admissions.

Cal tried to keep of URM numbers because California is one of the most liberal states in the country and they had the support of the their board and the state government. The reality is that most public schools will not even try. . They will comply with the law and with whatever direction they are given by their legal departments. Some private schools may try to skirt the law, but I wouldn't expect Michigan or UNC to do the same

Skirting the law is not the appropriate way to describe this--it's following what the majority opinion explicitly and directly said is central to their opinion. I agree they may have a hard time recruiting and admitting diverse populations (UC system shows for instance that many admitted Black students do not want to attend because of lack of diversity which amplifies the issue). Public schools in highly segregated states however (like UNC) might be able to adopt a geographical formula for in-state applications--top x percent of students from each school admitted

It's skirting the law. Robert's line allowed for a kid who writes about overcoming adversity in terms of race to be admitted. based on the diversity overcome, not because they are black. I'm sure it will take a few years to flesh out, but I think everyone who thinks they've found a way around a ruling will be disappointed. As far as UNC and other state schools, you're assuming their state governments and appointed boards will want them to find ways around the ruling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's changing is that pretty soon the parents on this board will have lost one of their favorite reasons for why their mediocre kid didn't get into an ivy league school.

+1000

With 96% rejected, it likely was not "race" that got them rejected. More likely it was the "intended major" in Engineering that was full/they are competing against way too many for way to few slots

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's such a complex issue.
I wrestle with how to remedy systemic poverty, inequities in the delivery and quality of education, provide the many kinds of social supports that taxpayers would support if they are effective. Yet I don't know the best way to do that.
Something that will change is that privileged majority families like ours will not be able to blame other people for "taking their spot", something I've heard a lot in the past couple of admissions cycles. The process is hard but it felt wrong to see the finger pointing.

It will shift from blaming the poor kid to blaming the rural kid. Just keep in mind that there always has to be someone to blame

Sadly, I think you will be right.

The poor kids are still getting a preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone says California has pushed SAT and ACT aside.

But the fact is, APs carry more weight in California than any other state.

ANd APs test actual content---take a class, learn the material, pass the test and get college credit. Someone who can get all 5s on 8 AP classes is better prepared for college than someone who took 8 APs and got all 3s or a mix of 4/5s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if today's ruling will affect professional schools, such as medical school or law school? Affirmative action makes more sense to me for professional schools, for the same reason that you want a police force to roughly reflect the racial makeup of the community they serve. Similarly, doctors will be better able to serve a community if their racial makeup reflects that of the community they serve.

There are already studies that in areas with more black doctors, blacks have an increased life expectancy. It does help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's such a complex issue.
I wrestle with how to remedy systemic poverty, inequities in the delivery and quality of education, provide the many kinds of social supports that taxpayers would support if they are effective. Yet I don't know the best way to do that.
Something that will change is that privileged majority families like ours will not be able to blame other people for "taking their spot", something I've heard a lot in the past couple of admissions cycles. The process is hard but it felt wrong to see the finger pointing.

It will shift from blaming the poor kid to blaming the rural kid. Just keep in mind that there always has to be someone to blame

Sadly, I think you will be right.

The poor kids are still getting a preference.

Its not just about poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's changing is that pretty soon the parents on this board will have lost one of their favorite reasons for why their mediocre kid didn't get into an ivy league school.

absolutely - but you know they will still finger point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative Action, like abortion, is a liberal totem that was never to be changed. And when it is, the wailing and gnashing of teeth is deafening.

no teeth gnashing here - i'm just very curious how this will play out. I feel like it won't play out like people expect

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think college admissions officers are going to get very tired of reading essays about how race affected my life...

There is nothing to stop them from saying that we are race blind and will disregard any applicant whose essay focuses on race.

Except that they value having a diverse class so it makes no sense that they would do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think college admissions officers are going to get very tired of reading essays about how race affected my life...

There is nothing to stop them from saying that we are race blind and will disregard any applicant whose essay focuses on race.

Except that they value having a diverse class so it makes no sense that they would do that.

They also value not paying out their endowment in settlements. Do you really think AOs will be able to explain the nuances to their staffs without accidentally stepping over the line between admissions based on adversity and admissions based on the disclosure of race? Do you trust admissions staffs to stay silent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think college admissions officers are going to get very tired of reading essays about how race affected my life...

There is nothing to stop them from saying that we are race blind and will disregard any applicant whose essay focuses on race.

Except that they value having a diverse class so it makes no sense that they would do that.

They also value not paying out their endowment in settlements. Do you really think AOs will be able to explain the nuances to their staffs without accidentally stepping over the line between admissions based on adversity and admissions based on the disclosure of race? Do you trust admissions staffs to stay silent?

Of course they will. But go ahead and sue because your entitled little genius did not get into Princeton.