Students Seize Dartmouth President's Office

[Anonymous]

Will Dartmouth finally change?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/behavior-at-dartmouth-tarnishing-image-of-elite-campus-colleges-president-says/2014/04/16/bf1f2fec-c587-11e3-8b9a-8e0977a24aeb_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me get this straight. You guys are discouraging your kids from considering multiple schools that offer truly excellent educations, just because a handful of kids tried to protest something once or twice? SMH

Yep. Know why? Because I would not want a professor teaching my kids this kind of idiocy. White Supremacy U? What an ass!

Newsflash: there are profs like this at every college in the country. Every single college. At Liberty University it might be a prof teaching creationism and that Darwinism is the devil's work (FWIW, I'm Christian).

Also, it was probably tongue and cheek. You don't know. You're jumping to conclusions -- which surely any *good* prof would discourage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me get this straight. You guys are discouraging your kids from considering multiple schools that offer truly excellent educations, just because a handful of kids tried to protest something once or twice? SMH

I don't read the posts quite like that.

Seems like the issue with Dartmouth goes way behind a group of idiots taking possession of the President's office....this school (whcih just incurred a significant drop in applications and they've appointed a committed to figure out "why") has other problems...namely the hazings and incredible drunken student behavior all very well docuemnted...so need to fight it out here on this board.....no one discounts that there may be good instructors but the one that allegedly brweought all this on......shoudl be fired....of coruse one can't do that since its "free speech" and all of that....

Well my Dartmouth-educated self understands that the right to free speech means that the government can't (with some exceptions) infringe on this right. It does not protect individuals from being fired by a private employer. Bug love the disdainful quotes around this first right enshrined in the Bill of Rights of our Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Any Dartmouth event involving the words "student" and "seizure" probably refers to a rich kid suffering alcohol poisoning while on drugs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Realize that this event transpired last week but is anyone still seriously consdiering attending such a school when the studnet seieze the President's office? Wait! Is this 1967 revisited? Wait! ....At least those protests revovled around legitmate social issues.

But folloiwng the lead of a professor claiming the school is "White Supremacy U"? Give us all break.



http://thedartmouth.com/2014/04/02/news/students-occupy-parkhurst-demand-point-by-point-response-to-freedom-budget

Awesome that you're apparently concerned about the endemic, horrible frat scene, but a handful of protesters and one loony prof have you up in arms!

[Anonymous]

^^^ UNconcerned about the endemic, horrible frat scene

[Anonymous]

Dartmouth president's office seized???

Was it the result of an uproar over the dining hall being out of Grey Poupon?

[Anonymous]

Way, way back in the day, my dad was nearly kicked out of Cornell for a prank that involved taking over the student radio station right before graduation. He was allowed to graduate in the end. But seriously guys, protesting and taking over campus facilities is a time-honored tradition and in no way signifies that a college is going down the drain of left-wing extremism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Realize that this event transpired last week but is anyone still seriously consdiering attending such a school when the studnet seieze the President's office? Wait! Is this 1967 revisited? Wait! ....At least those protests revovled around legitmate social issues.

But folloiwng the lead of a professor claiming the school is "White Supremacy U"? Give us all break.



http://thedartmouth.com/2014/04/02/news/students-occupy-parkhurst-demand-point-by-point-response-to-freedom-budget

Nobody has to go to Dartmouth or to teach there. If the students think the school is so fundamentally wrong for them, then there are plenty of kids who would like to take their places. Same with the professor. While I would question the academic bona fides of any professor who still sounds like Angela Davis in the 21st century, if Dartmouth isn't the right fit, there are lots of talented PhDs out there who could teach at Dartmouth.

[Anonymous]

Entirely predictable. Affirmative action has failed miserably and may well be contributing to persistent racial stereotypes. Affirmative action has led to a constellation of "diverse" campuses at which the black and Latino students are BY DESIGN less qualified than the white and Asian students on campus.

The long journey to a truly color blind society cannot even begin until we end legally sanctioned discrimination by race. I'm all for helping kids from lower SES backgrounds, but the children of black lawyers and doctors who were educated in elite private schools should NOT be given preference over the first generation college applicant from a family of white coal miners in West Virginia. Race is NOT a reliable proxy for low SES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Entirely predictable. Affirmative action has failed miserably and may well be contributing to persistent racial stereotypes. Affirmative action has led to a constellation of "diverse" campuses at which the black and Latino students are BY DESIGN less qualified than the white and Asian students on campus.

The long journey to a truly color blind society cannot even begin until we end legally sanctioned discrimination by race. I'm all for helping kids from lower SES backgrounds, but the children of black lawyers and doctors who were educated in elite private schools should NOT be given preference over the first generation college applicant from a family of white coal miners in West Virginia. Race is NOT a reliable proxy for low SES.

So, so untrue. You've been told many, many times before that at the very top universities, after the first cut of applicants is made, EVERYBODY in the second round is pretty much EQUALLY qualified and affirmative action at the most provides one more thumb on the scale among EQUALLY qualified applicants.

But what makes me think you'll understand this now, when you've been told so many times before? I think you're the same poster I didn't have time for on the other thread. So I'll stop there.

Signed, white Ivy mom of Ivy kid who (unlike you) has seen this process play out multiple times and actually understands how it works

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entirely predictable. Affirmative action has failed miserably and may well be contributing to persistent racial stereotypes. Affirmative action has led to a constellation of "diverse" campuses at which the black and Latino students are BY DESIGN less qualified than the white and Asian students on campus.

The long journey to a truly color blind society cannot even begin until we end legally sanctioned discrimination by race. I'm all for helping kids from lower SES backgrounds, but the children of black lawyers and doctors who were educated in elite private schools should NOT be given preference over the first generation college applicant from a family of white coal miners in West Virginia. Race is NOT a reliable proxy for low SES.

So, so untrue. You've been told many, many times before that at the very top universities, after the first cut of applicants is made, EVERYBODY in the second round is pretty much EQUALLY qualified and affirmative action at the most provides one more thumb on the scale among EQUALLY qualified applicants.

But what makes me think you'll understand this now, when you've been told so many times before? I think you're the same poster I didn't have time for on the other thread. So I'll stop there.

Signed, white Ivy mom of Ivy kid who (unlike you) has seen this process play out multiple times and actually understands how it works

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entirely predictable. Affirmative action has failed miserably and may well be contributing to persistent racial stereotypes. Affirmative action has led to a constellation of "diverse" campuses at which the black and Latino students are BY DESIGN less qualified than the white and Asian students on campus.

The long journey to a truly color blind society cannot even begin until we end legally sanctioned discrimination by race. I'm all for helping kids from lower SES backgrounds, but the children of black lawyers and doctors who were educated in elite private schools should NOT be given preference over the first generation college applicant from a family of white coal miners in West Virginia. Race is NOT a reliable proxy for low SES.

So, so untrue. You've been told many, many times before that at the very top universities, after the first cut of applicants is made, EVERYBODY in the second round is pretty much EQUALLY qualified and affirmative action at the most provides one more thumb on the scale among EQUALLY qualified applicants.

But what makes me think you'll understand this now, when you've been told so many times before? I think you're the same poster I didn't have time for on the other thread. So I'll stop there.

Signed, white Ivy mom of Ivy kid who (unlike you) has seen this process play out multiple times and actually understands how it works

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/

http://www.law.du.edu/documents/denver-university-law-review/v88-4/Sander%20Final_ToPrinter_917.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entirely predictable. Affirmative action has failed miserably and may well be contributing to persistent racial stereotypes. Affirmative action has led to a constellation of "diverse" campuses at which the black and Latino students are BY DESIGN less qualified than the white and Asian students on campus.

The long journey to a truly color blind society cannot even begin until we end legally sanctioned discrimination by race. I'm all for helping kids from lower SES backgrounds, but the children of black lawyers and doctors who were educated in elite private schools should NOT be given preference over the first generation college applicant from a family of white coal miners in West Virginia. Race is NOT a reliable proxy for low SES.

So, so untrue. You've been told many, many times before that at the very top universities, after the first cut of applicants is made, EVERYBODY in the second round is pretty much EQUALLY qualified and affirmative action at the most provides one more thumb on the scale among EQUALLY qualified applicants.

But what makes me think you'll understand this now, when you've been told so many times before? I think you're the same poster I didn't have time for on the other thread. So I'll stop there.

Signed, white Ivy mom of Ivy kid who (unlike you) has seen this process play out multiple times and actually understands how it works

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/

http://www.law.du.edu/documents/denver-university-law-review/v88-4/Sander%20Final_ToPrinter_917.pdf

Two articles from authors of differing political viewpoints. Though I tend to agree with the Denver law link, I welcome differing opinions.

[Anonymous]

As noted, there is abundant evidence that upper-middle
class minorities have made dramatic gains over the past fifty years, and experience genuine access to mainstream American institutions. There are still significant problems for these groups—most of them related to continuing high levels of racial housing segregation and the persistent test-score gap—but in most ways the landscape has been transformed since 1960. BUT this is not so for low-SES households of all races. While racial inequality has steadily diminished, economic inequality has steadily increased. The United States in modern times has tended to be one of
the more economically divided countries in the developed world. Focusing on skin tone rather than social economic status reinforces the problem.