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:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

There are tons of Asian leaders.

In China and Japan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

Not the same poster as above.

You and many others in this forum seem to want to believe there's a lot of animosity toward Asians here. It may be true in MAGA country (I don't know), but you're wrong about it on DCUM. Most visitors to this site are from the DC area, and most of us have grown up having SIGNIFICANT positive interaction with people of all races and know that it's the individual that matters, not what race they're a member of.

Many of the posts on this specific thread (not the one you responded to, in my opinion) are made by trolls who enjoy provoking a reaction. It's an important skill to be able to recognize these posts and to ignore them. If you don't, you're going to get the wrong impression about what people here believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

You've misunderstood me (pp here). I am talking about groups that go un or underrepresented in leadership, using military officers as an example. It was a problem in the armed forces that had to be remedied by being race conscious (why I mentioned ocs). I am talking about including, not excluding. That is what the admissions offices are trying to do -- make sure the underrepresented minorities have some presence at these institutions. Have diverse representation in leadership because having different perspectives is important. No one is seeking to exclude other students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

Not the same poster as above.

You and many others in this forum seem to want to believe there's a lot of animosity toward Asians here. It may be true in MAGA country (I don't know), but you're wrong about it on DCUM.

In point of fact MAGA Republicans have a much higher opinion of Asians than do Democrats (including people on DCUM who are primarily Democrats). It is Democrats, not MAGA Republicans, who are in the administration of all these universities who are trying to keep the number of Asians to an "acceptable minimum". It is Democrats, not MAGA Republicans, who are tying themselves in knots trying to rationalize why it's not racism ackshually, just Holistic Admissions Criteria, to give preference to blacks over Asians for elite college admissions. All that "Asians are just boring grade-grubbing robots" talk? Yeah that's Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

You've misunderstood me (pp here). I am talking about groups that go un or underrepresented in leadership, using military officers as an example. It was a problem in the armed forces that had to be remedied by being race conscious (why I mentioned ocs). I am talking about including, not excluding. That is what the admissions offices are trying to do -- make sure the underrepresented minorities have some presence at these institutions. Have diverse representation in leadership because having different perspectives is important. No one is seeking to exclude other students.

Giving "presence" to one race, for racial reasons, of necessity excludes other students of other races. And you only have to look at the numbers to see that elite universities are consciously seeking to exclude Asians.

And all this leaves aside the question of whether "race consciousness" has improved our military leadership. Seems to me we haven't won a lot of wars lately...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

That shows opportunity not ability to learn

Nope. Everyone has the opportunity to take the AP exams. You just have to want it. Value the importance. Basically, education needs to be a priority for you.

Not everyone has the opportunity to take AP classes though. And not everyone has the opportunity to leave their zoned school for a better one — for a variety of reasons. But, yeah, they can indeed take the exam.
Prioritizing and valuing education does not always lead to opportunities— let alone to useful opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

That shows opportunity not ability to learn

Nope. Everyone has the opportunity to take the AP exams. You just have to want it. Value the importance. Basically, education needs to be a priority for you.

No everyone does not have that opportunity, my school did not even offer Calculus only pre-calc.

[Anonymous]

elite schools like Harvard have endowments large enough to increase the size of their incoming classes to make room for candidates who add to their diversity without doing so at the expense of Asian applicants with stronger academic credentials. But they choose not to increase the supply even slightly to better meet the qualified demand. They have created the zero-sum game that pits one race against another. Lowering standards for one group happens at the expense of another. How come nobody is pointing the finger at Harvard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2018:

707 black kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC
19,710 Asian kids got a 5 on AP CalcBC

Herein lies the problem

In U.S. education based on the unique history of this country, I'm not surprised this gross disparity exists.

However in strictly looking at the zero sum dynamic of elite college admissions, it is supply and demand.

Those 707 black students - and black students of that caliber - are in extremely high demand.

When you see the news articles about a black kid getting accepted to ALL of the Ivies, this is the cohort.

So when detractors say that these same black kids at elite schools are " unqualified," no they are not.

?? Why would anyone say these kids who got 5 on AP Calc BC are not qualified? most of them are probably well qualified. However when we go color blind, they might not get in all of the Ivies. Race should not be treated as rare commodity. These kids are probably the biggest victims of Affirmative Action. They don’t get the credit they deserve.

These kids would absolutely benefit from affirmative action -- it uses race as only 1 factor to tip the scales when students are typically competitive. Without it, the number of African American students, based on this stat, would drop just by the odds of number of kids earning 5s on this AP. Then the schools lose out on diversity, and society loses out on leadership. There was an excellent argument made about integration in OCS and equity. Race has to be a factor to achieve equity at times.

"Society loses out on leadership" showing your bias that Asians can't be leaders.

Not the same poster as above.

You and many others in this forum seem to want to believe there's a lot of animosity toward Asians here. It may be true in MAGA country (I don't know), but you're wrong about it on DCUM.

In point of fact MAGA Republicans have a much higher opinion of Asians than do Democrats (including people on DCUM who are primarily Democrats). It is Democrats, not MAGA Republicans, who are in the administration of all these universities who are trying to keep the number of Asians to an "acceptable minimum". It is Democrats, not MAGA Republicans, who are tying themselves in knots trying to rationalize why it's not racism ackshually, just Holistic Admissions Criteria, to give preference to blacks over Asians for elite college admissions. All that "Asians are just boring grade-grubbing robots" talk? Yeah that's Democrats.

You're either a troll or totally oblivious to the reality around you. The leader of MAGA uses racial slurs to refer to Asians regularly, which encourages his followers to do the same. You've never lived in real MAGA country if you believe MAGA likes Asians, and you've never been in an admissions committee meeting if you believe any of them--regardless of political affiliation--are trying to exclude Asians.

[Anonymous]

Any other countries in the Universe
use this level of total bullshit in college admission- scoring kindness courage likability
DISGUSTING.

and there are people on this forum supporting that.
SUBHUMAN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

"more fair"?

Basketball players are judge by how well they play basketball
Dancers are judged by how well they dance
Legacies are judged by how well they help fund the school and if they will provide connections to current students
Some kids are judged by SAT scores
Some kids are judged by the fact they started a movement after somebody shot up their school


If you want to be in the top 5% there are many ways to do that and GPA and SAT is only one way. Stop using that measure to say the other kids were not qualified.
If 20 kids are great basketball players the coach picks the 5 he wants, you don't have to understand why he picked those 5 kids. I don't care if you scored more baskets than the 5 he chose.

The core issue is that those schools that have been practicing holistic admissions still weren’t getting the “desired” diversity that they wanted when looking at all of those factors you’ve mentioned without directly looking at race. As a result, at least Harvard systemically and artificially reduced totally subjective personality scores on Asian applicants at the admissions office level. Let’s stop with the trope that Asian applicants were just robots studying for grades and test scores - the Harvard disclosures showed that Asian applicants also had leadership positions and extracurricular activities in line (or better) than all other races. The one factor that changed was the admissions office that never met these applicants putting in lower personality scores for Asians. THAT is patently unfair no matter how much one believes in a desired outcome.

We know it’s patently unfair because if you replace “Asian” with any other race (or religion or sex or sexual orientation), it would be recognized as racist right away. If Black students were getting the best grades, garnering the highest test scores, and had extracurricular activities and interview scores that were in line with every other race… but then the Harvard admissions office assigned a totally subjective personality score to Blacks that were lower than all other races because they were worried that Blacks would be too overrepresented at Harvard, that would rightfully be called out as racist immediately. If you applied Jewish people in that hypothetical, it would rightly be called antisemitic immediately (and that’s actually what happened at elite schools in the middle of the 20th century - it’s why holistic admissions exist in the first place). For some reason, people either don’t recognize that the fact this pattern is happening to Asians is racist or, arguably even worse, effectively know that it’s racist but think that the ends justify the means, it appalling to me.

By and large, I’m a liberal on cultural issues. I volunteer for the Democratic Party and will be voting for them on Tuesday up and down the ballot for many reasons. However, on this particular issue, too many liberals seem to have a complete blind spot. I firmly believe in DEI efforts as a goal, but they simply can’t use racist policies (against a minority group, no less) to achieve such goals as that defeats the idea behind DEI initiatives in the first place.

+1 this post should be required reading for all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

"more fair"?

Basketball players are judge by how well they play basketball
Dancers are judged by how well they dance
Legacies are judged by how well they help fund the school and if they will provide connections to current students
Some kids are judged by SAT scores
Some kids are judged by the fact they started a movement after somebody shot up their school


If you want to be in the top 5% there are many ways to do that and GPA and SAT is only one way. Stop using that measure to say the other kids were not qualified.
If 20 kids are great basketball players the coach picks the 5 he wants, you don't have to understand why he picked those 5 kids. I don't care if you scored more baskets than the 5 he chose.

The core issue is that those schools that have been practicing holistic admissions still weren’t getting the “desired” diversity that they wanted when looking at all of those factors you’ve mentioned without directly looking at race. As a result, at least Harvard systemically and artificially reduced totally subjective personality scores on Asian applicants at the admissions office level. Let’s stop with the trope that Asian applicants were just robots studying for grades and test scores - the Harvard disclosures showed that Asian applicants also had leadership positions and extracurricular activities in line (or better) than all other races. The one factor that changed was the admissions office that never met these applicants putting in lower personality scores for Asians. THAT is patently unfair no matter how much one believes in a desired outcome.

We know it’s patently unfair because if you replace “Asian” with any other race (or religion or sex or sexual orientation), it would be recognized as racist right away. If Black students were getting the best grades, garnering the highest test scores, and had extracurricular activities and interview scores that were in line with every other race… but then the Harvard admissions office assigned a totally subjective personality score to Blacks that were lower than all other races because they were worried that Blacks would be too overrepresented at Harvard, that would rightfully be called out as racist immediately. If you applied Jewish people in that hypothetical, it would rightly be called antisemitic immediately (and that’s actually what happened at elite schools in the middle of the 20th century - it’s why holistic admissions exist in the first place). For some reason, people either don’t recognize that the fact this pattern is happening to Asians is racist or, arguably even worse, effectively know that it’s racist but think that the ends justify the means, it appalling to me.

By and large, I’m a liberal on cultural issues. I volunteer for the Democratic Party and will be voting for them on Tuesday up and down the ballot for many reasons. However, on this particular issue, too many liberals seem to have a complete blind spot. I firmly believe in DEI efforts as a goal, but they simply can’t use racist policies (against a minority group, no less) to achieve such goals as that defeats the idea behind DEI initiatives in the first place.

+1 this post should be required reading for all

Its just common sense.
Some people just try hard arguing against the common sense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

"more fair"?

Basketball players are judge by how well they play basketball
Dancers are judged by how well they dance
Legacies are judged by how well they help fund the school and if they will provide connections to current students
Some kids are judged by SAT scores
Some kids are judged by the fact they started a movement after somebody shot up their school


If you want to be in the top 5% there are many ways to do that and GPA and SAT is only one way. Stop using that measure to say the other kids were not qualified.
If 20 kids are great basketball players the coach picks the 5 he wants, you don't have to understand why he picked those 5 kids. I don't care if you scored more baskets than the 5 he chose.

The core issue is that those schools that have been practicing holistic admissions still weren’t getting the “desired” diversity that they wanted when looking at all of those factors you’ve mentioned without directly looking at race. As a result, at least Harvard systemically and artificially reduced totally subjective personality scores on Asian applicants at the admissions office level. Let’s stop with the trope that Asian applicants were just robots studying for grades and test scores - the Harvard disclosures showed that Asian applicants also had leadership positions and extracurricular activities in line (or better) than all other races. The one factor that changed was the admissions office that never met these applicants putting in lower personality scores for Asians. THAT is patently unfair no matter how much one believes in a desired outcome.

We know it’s patently unfair because if you replace “Asian” with any other race (or religion or sex or sexual orientation), it would be recognized as racist right away. If Black students were getting the best grades, garnering the highest test scores, and had extracurricular activities and interview scores that were in line with every other race… but then the Harvard admissions office assigned a totally subjective personality score to Blacks that were lower than all other races because they were worried that Blacks would be too overrepresented at Harvard, that would rightfully be called out as racist immediately. If you applied Jewish people in that hypothetical, it would rightly be called antisemitic immediately (and that’s actually what happened at elite schools in the middle of the 20th century - it’s why holistic admissions exist in the first place). For some reason, people either don’t recognize that the fact this pattern is happening to Asians is racist or, arguably even worse, effectively know that it’s racist but think that the ends justify the means, it appalling to me.

By and large, I’m a liberal on cultural issues. I volunteer for the Democratic Party and will be voting for them on Tuesday up and down the ballot for many reasons. However, on this particular issue, too many liberals seem to have a complete blind spot. I firmly believe in DEI efforts as a goal, but they simply can’t use racist policies (against a minority group, no less) to achieve such goals as that defeats the idea behind DEI initiatives in the first place.

+1 this post should be required reading for all

Except for the fact that there's no proof that Harvard looked at the applications of Asian applicants and lowered their scores in order to keep them out.