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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

The SAT is a fake meritocracy. That "exam" is becoming less relevant each admissions cycle.

And that "study" some anonymous poster is claiming? Nonsense and no citations.

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

If you don’t get it you don’t get it.

Hard work is out smart work is in,

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

If you don’t get it you don’t get it.

Hard work is out smart work is in,

No pain no gain.

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

If you don’t get it you don’t get it.

Hard work is out smart work is in,

No pain no gain.

That’s so 2000 and late

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

If you don’t get it you don’t get it.

Hard work is out smart work is in,

No pain no gain.

That’s so 2000 and late

Cherry picking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It's the same in college admissions. This case is just deciding if Harvard is being unconstitutional in its use of criteria. If they say race cannot be a criterion, that's all it applies to. They can use anything else they want, including geographic diversity, socioeconomic diversity, etc., that would still allow them to take exactly the same students they've been taking.

They are not deciding if Harvard is being unconstitutional. Harvard is a private university and cannot act in an unconstitutional way. The Supreme Court is deciding if Harvard is violating any laws. Whether its admissions policies constitute discrimination under those laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The "proof" is that they give those applicants lower "likeability" scores without ever having met them face to face even as the interviewers who did meet the applicant gave them high "likeability" scores

As the ^PP stated, can you imagine if the admissions office rated blacks as "not likeable" without ever having met them? NAACP would be all over it.

But here, it's fine that they do that to Asian Americans because that group is over represented anyways.

Diversity is important, yes. We chose a cluster for its diversity, but what Harvard did there was unfair and racist.

What is the % of other applicants who were scored "not likeable" by the admissions office? If it was equally as high, then you have an argument that Harvard did no wrong. Does someone have that info?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The "proof" is that they give those applicants lower "likeability" scores without ever having met them face to face even as the interviewers who did meet the applicant gave them high "likeability" scores

As the ^PP stated, can you imagine if the admissions office rated blacks as "not likeable" without ever having met them? NAACP would be all over it.

But here, it's fine that they do that to Asian Americans because that group is over represented anyways.

Diversity is important, yes. We chose a cluster for its diversity, but what Harvard did there was unfair and racist.

What is the % of other applicants who were scored "not likeable" by the admissions office? If it was equally as high, then you have an argument that Harvard did no wrong. Does someone have that info?

There wasn't any discrimination. The lower courts ruled as such.

This is now POLITICAL because a conservative group SFFA now has the case before the conservative SCOTUS majority.

Asians are being used as political pawns in this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

Right, not sure about more intelligent.
However prep on Test, prep on GPA, prep on Activities, prep on Leadership, prep on Awards, those who care, put efforts and work hard certainly deserve more of the scgools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The "proof" is that they give those applicants lower "likeability" scores without ever having met them face to face even as the interviewers who did meet the applicant gave them high "likeability" scores

As the ^PP stated, can you imagine if the admissions office rated blacks as "not likeable" without ever having met them? NAACP would be all over it.

But here, it's fine that they do that to Asian Americans because that group is over represented anyways.

Diversity is important, yes. We chose a cluster for its diversity, but what Harvard did there was unfair and racist.

What is the % of other applicants who were scored "not likeable" by the admissions office? If it was equally as high, then you have an argument that Harvard did no wrong. Does someone have that info?

There wasn't any discrimination. The lower courts ruled as such.

This is now POLITICAL because a conservative group SFFA now has the case before the conservative SCOTUS majority.

Asians are being used as political pawns in this case.

Lower court was wrong, that's why we also have Supreme Court.
You can’t cherry pick what you like. Racial discrimination is not acceptable

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

The SAT is a fake meritocracy. That "exam" is becoming less relevant each admissions cycle.

And that "study" some anonymous poster is claiming? Nonsense and no citations.

LOL 3 of the top 20 schools renoved SAT/ACT -
CalTech, Berkeley, UCLA, and Black students: 6% 3% 2%
Lowest among T20. Why are you hating Black people.

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

“Intelligence” connotes something innate to some people, so leave that out. But Asians definitely have higher academic achievement and preparedness by college age, and definitely study harder. Data supports both. In particular one study has Asians studying 4x Blacks, and 2x Whites. Do you find this surprising? And do you think there is no link between studying and academic quality from an admissions standpoint?

Asians do not have higher achievement.

You think high test scores = high achievement. You actually think “study more” is something Harvard desires, they don’t. If you told me Asian study 10x less and get 10x high scores I’d be impressed. If it takes these Asians you have made up in your head 10x longer to learn the material perhaps they aren’t smart enough for Harvard.

Nobody GAF about studying hard and getting straight A’s. Once you are within the Ivy index you are “qualified”, then it takes something else to get accepted.

One thing we do know is that grades and changing the world (whether positive or negative) are not GPA/SAT related once you hit the Ivy index.

Harvard is not a “reward” for hard work, Harvard is not looking for a good hard worker. Harvard wants people who are in unicorns, that seem like they have some sort of je ne sais quoi.

That’s the problem with rule followers. You want to know the measurable equation to get into Harvard and thee isn’t one.

For example, the Parkland kids, they all have terrible GPAs and SAT scores. But they have something to offer that most kids can’t.

Mic drop. They are looking for change makers and leaders. Regardless of grades and regardless of race, too.

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

“Intelligence” connotes something innate to some people, so leave that out. But Asians definitely have higher academic achievement and preparedness by college age, and definitely study harder. Data supports both. In particular one study has Asians studying 4x Blacks, and 2x Whites. Do you find this surprising? And do you think there is no link between studying and academic quality from an admissions standpoint?

Asians do not have higher achievement.

You think high test scores = high achievement. You actually think “study more” is something Harvard desires, they don’t. If you told me Asian study 10x less and get 10x high scores I’d be impressed. If it takes these Asians you have made up in your head 10x longer to learn the material perhaps they aren’t smart enough for Harvard.

Nobody GAF about studying hard and getting straight A’s. Once you are within the Ivy index you are “qualified”, then it takes something else to get accepted.

One thing we do know is that grades and changing the world (whether positive or negative) are not GPA/SAT related once you hit the Ivy index.

Harvard is not a “reward” for hard work, Harvard is not looking for a good hard worker. Harvard wants people who are in unicorns, that seem like they have some sort of je ne sais quoi.

That’s the problem with rule followers. You want to know the measurable equation to get into Harvard and thee isn’t one.

For example, the Parkland kids, they all have terrible GPAs and SAT scores. But they have something to offer that most kids can’t.

100% agree, and it has nothing to do with race, and so they don't need to look at one's skin color violating Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The "proof" is that they give those applicants lower "likeability" scores without ever having met them face to face even as the interviewers who did meet the applicant gave them high "likeability" scores

As the ^PP stated, can you imagine if the admissions office rated blacks as "not likeable" without ever having met them? NAACP would be all over it.

But here, it's fine that they do that to Asian Americans because that group is over represented anyways.

Diversity is important, yes. We chose a cluster for its diversity, but what Harvard did there was unfair and racist.

What is the % of other applicants who were scored "not likeable" by the admissions office? If it was equally as high, then you have an argument that Harvard did no wrong. Does someone have that info?

Your argument is illogical. They didn't see ANY applicants face to face when giving personality scores, so that's irrelevant.

And if you break down any measure using any demographic, one group will come out on bottom and one will come out on top, necessarily. To say it must be discrimination against the group that scores lowest makes no sense.

If you were to look at the personality scores by US state, someone would be at the bottom. If that state was Minnesota, would you say that Harvard was deliberately excluding Minnesotans?

If you were to break it down by musical instrument played and those who played the viola had the lowest scores, are they being demonized?

[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: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...

The numbers prove the opposite. There is a far higher percentage of Asian American students in top colleges than the overall population.

No, the numbers clearly prove discrimination.

Asians students are disproportionately intelligent and hardworking relative to their numbers in the population. The proportion of Asians you would see at top colleges on the basis of merit would be far higher than it is - the numbers are lower than they should be because the top schools are discriminating against them. To put it in terms people in the DMV would understand, without discrimination the demographics at the top colleges would look like the demographics of TJ High School - 60 or 70% Asian.

More intelligent.. no that is not proven

Harder working … no that is not proven

Are obsessed with test prep… yes Asian and white prep school kids are obsessed with top $ tutors and test prep

+1000

LOL. What does it say about a group of people that put little to no effort into preparing for an exam important to one’s educational opportunities.

One thing it says is that they don’t realize this. Another thing it says is that the exam might not be the most important factor either in accessing educational opportunities or in eventual success — however that is measured.

- Yale graduate who was never told I needed to take or prepare for the SAT.
- POC who realizes that someone in power deciding who seems like a comfortable, familiar “good fit” will almost always be a critical factor when it comes to accessing resources and opportunities of many kinds.