Accreditors are considering dropping diversity requirements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

So it’s okay to turn into Europe but not China?

I don’t want either. I don’t want a Gaokao or an a levels system in the US. If you do, that’s…interesting, but I don’t think there’s a massive push to make high school much much harder than it currently is.

There's only one segment who wants this and they actually come from those systems.... so the question is why.

They don’t like having to actually think.

Hmmm interesting self-reflection from you …

I get that you exist in a cloud of gotcha arguments, but there’s no appeal to the gaokao. Your kids probably study enough, now imagine everything they done making them behind and they’d need to restart high school at 4 times the pace, go to Saturday school, and stay till 10 pm in order to catch up with their competition

All these are just smear campaigns against those talented kids, trying to reduce them into someone who can only put in hours, as if effort without ability explains everything. as if grinding alone could produce that level of excellence. It’s projection, and a bitter attempt to drag others down to justify their own mediocrity. You can’t match the results, so you attack the method.

I can't match the result? No, I can't, because I chose Harvard over having the goal of Peking University. The systems in East Asia are toxic and awfully demanding for children.

Again, you’re equating merit based system with Chinese system, part of your smear campaign. You don’t sound too smart.

Then...talk about a merit based system that wouldn't include a dramatic resorting of our education process and intense climb in academics.

Intense climb? Really? Is it possible they’re just smarter and have better intellectual talent?

what merit system do you want? What practical changes do you want to see? Not everything needs to be a flex about your intelligence.

Something not based on one’s identity to start with. How about that?

Which would include...? I'm asking for changes in processes, not your personal propaganda.

Go back to search this thread to find out the specifics. I sssume you’re at least capable of doing that which doesn’t involve much intelligence.

Yeah, your adjectives list isn't helpful. People want to know changes to their children's education and what to prioritize. Not that you're grumpy black people got into college.

No you don’t want to know anything. You just wanted the status quo’s which isn’t happening. Too bad. Cry me a river.

? Make a point, Jesus.

You’re too dumb to see the point. It’s like dumb students keeep asking teachers to explain a simple concept again and again. Now I get your hatred towards meritocracy.

Your point has been made. You don't have anything to say, but you hate black people. We get it, but that isn't exactly an indictment of anything but your personal racism. Now, are you ready to talk about what a meritocratic system looks like or will you cower again with some other nonsensical personal insult that won't carry the conversation. You've run away every time I've basically asked you to explain your perspective.

DP

When you make baseless accusations of racism in 2025, you are not only 5 years too late but you are basiaclly just admitting you have no argument other than accusations of racism.
Nobody cares about being called a racist anymore because you guys cried wolf for so long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

So it’s okay to turn into Europe but not China?

I don’t want either. I don’t want a Gaokao or an a levels system in the US. If you do, that’s…interesting, but I don’t think there’s a massive push to make high school much much harder than it currently is.

There's only one segment who wants this and they actually come from those systems.... so the question is why.

They don’t like having to actually think.

Hmmm interesting self-reflection from you …

I get that you exist in a cloud of gotcha arguments, but there’s no appeal to the gaokao. Your kids probably study enough, now imagine everything they done making them behind and they’d need to restart high school at 4 times the pace, go to Saturday school, and stay till 10 pm in order to catch up with their competition

All these are just smear campaigns against those talented kids, trying to reduce them into someone who can only put in hours, as if effort without ability explains everything. as if grinding alone could produce that level of excellence. It’s projection, and a bitter attempt to drag others down to justify their own mediocrity. You can’t match the results, so you attack the method.

I can't match the result? No, I can't, because I chose Harvard over having the goal of Peking University. The systems in East Asia are toxic and awfully demanding for children.

Again, you’re equating merit based system with Chinese system, part of your smear campaign. You don’t sound too smart.

Then...talk about a merit based system that wouldn't include a dramatic resorting of our education process and intense climb in academics.

Intense climb? Really? Is it possible they’re just smarter and have better intellectual talent?

what merit system do you want? What practical changes do you want to see? Not everything needs to be a flex about your intelligence.

Something not based on one’s identity to start with. How about that?

Which would include...? I'm asking for changes in processes, not your personal propaganda.

Go back to search this thread to find out the specifics. I sssume you’re at least capable of doing that which doesn’t involve much intelligence.

Yeah, your adjectives list isn't helpful. People want to know changes to their children's education and what to prioritize. Not that you're grumpy black people got into college.

No you don’t want to know anything. You just wanted the status quo’s which isn’t happening. Too bad. Cry me a river.

? Make a point, Jesus.

You’re too dumb to see the point. It’s like dumb students keeep asking teachers to explain a simple concept again and again. Now I get your hatred towards meritocracy.

Your point has been made. You don't have anything to say, but you hate black people. We get it, but that isn't exactly an indictment of anything but your personal racism. Now, are you ready to talk about what a meritocratic system looks like or will you cower again with some other nonsensical personal insult that won't carry the conversation. You've run away every time I've basically asked you to explain your perspective.

Haha so what they say about your political ideology is true. To you people, everything is identity and you accuse people racist after losing an argument.

You haven't really made any claims other than the fact that you hate diversity, so not an unreasonable take that you may just be racist.

DP

Of course that is an unreasonable take you nimrod.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good system would be merit, so these whiners would realize their kids are nowhere near the top of intellect.

The issue is that merit and SES go hand in hand. Which is why it makes sense to make an effort to include first gen college students and students from lower SES, regardless of race.

No we should just commit to highest intellect. Poor people can go to other schools if they aren't smart. We should be about intellect first.

If you believe that “highest intellect” can be identified using a common test and testing a population at a certain age without regard to previous circumstances it is your intellect which is lacking.

DP

Yes.

There is an entire field of psychology devoted to measuring cognitive ability and it is not graded on a curve based on the circumstances of birth. It might have been more effort for a poor child to achieve high cognitive ability than one with around the clock tutors but that privileged kid actually has higher cognitive ability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

So it’s okay to turn into Europe but not China?

I don’t want either. I don’t want a Gaokao or an a levels system in the US. If you do, that’s…interesting, but I don’t think there’s a massive push to make high school much much harder than it currently is.

There's only one segment who wants this and they actually come from those systems.... so the question is why.

They don’t like having to actually think.

Hmmm interesting self-reflection from you …

I get that you exist in a cloud of gotcha arguments, but there’s no appeal to the gaokao. Your kids probably study enough, now imagine everything they done making them behind and they’d need to restart high school at 4 times the pace, go to Saturday school, and stay till 10 pm in order to catch up with their competition

All these are just smear campaigns against those talented kids, trying to reduce them into someone who can only put in hours, as if effort without ability explains everything. as if grinding alone could produce that level of excellence. It’s projection, and a bitter attempt to drag others down to justify their own mediocrity. You can’t match the results, so you attack the method.

I can't match the result? No, I can't, because I chose Harvard over having the goal of Peking University. The systems in East Asia are toxic and awfully demanding for children.

Again, you’re equating merit based system with Chinese system, part of your smear campaign. You don’t sound too smart.

Then...talk about a merit based system that wouldn't include a dramatic resorting of our education process and intense climb in academics.

Intense climb? Really? Is it possible they’re just smarter and have better intellectual talent?

what merit system do you want? What practical changes do you want to see? Not everything needs to be a flex about your intelligence.

Something not based on one’s identity to start with. How about that?

Which would include...? I'm asking for changes in processes, not your personal propaganda.

Go back to search this thread to find out the specifics. I sssume you’re at least capable of doing that which doesn’t involve much intelligence.

Yeah, your adjectives list isn't helpful. People want to know changes to their children's education and what to prioritize. Not that you're grumpy black people got into college.

No you don’t want to know anything. You just wanted the status quo’s which isn’t happening. Too bad. Cry me a river.

? Make a point, Jesus.

You’re too dumb to see the point. It’s like dumb students keeep asking teachers to explain a simple concept again and again. Now I get your hatred towards meritocracy.

Your point has been made. You don't have anything to say, but you hate black people. We get it, but that isn't exactly an indictment of anything but your personal racism. Now, are you ready to talk about what a meritocratic system looks like or will you cower again with some other nonsensical personal insult that won't carry the conversation. You've run away every time I've basically asked you to explain your perspective.

DP

When you make baseless accusations of racism in 2025, you are not only 5 years too late but you are basiaclly just admitting you have no argument other than accusations of racism.
Nobody cares about being called a racist anymore because you guys cried wolf for so long.

The repeat poster here went on some utterly insane rants that were reported and deleted. I do not care to repeat them here but they would have fit in perfectly well on an Stormfront. I find it a bit frustrating that they and you then say all of our accusations of racism are baseless. This person basically declared the intellectual superiority of one race!

[Anonymous]

I am not buying this “DP” crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

It has always been nearly impossible for poor students to compete with wealthy students and compete at the highest level. It is a rare talent that can overcome large wealth differences.

It is NOT a rare talent that can overcome racial disparity. Harvard is about 15%black. Without preferences it would be 6-8% black. This is not nothing but by pushing the rope to 15% you get a situation where Harvard is cannibalizing the Columbias of the world to achieve that 15% and the least qualified black students struggle a little bit because Harvard really isn't significantly more difficult than Columbia. But then Columbia has to cannibalize the Cornells of the world and by the time Cornell tries to achieve its diversity goals it is getting URM students that would have otherwise gone to USC and Northeastern and now the differences are large enough that almost none of the URM students are among the top students and are grossly over-represented among the worst performing students. If each of these schools accepted based on merit, they would all have somewhere between 6-8% black and 8-10% hispanic with the difference going pretty evenly to asians and whites.

This isn't RWNJs saying that this is how the numbers would shake out based on race blaind admissions standards. This is Harvard and the amicus briefs saying this is how the numbers would shake out without explicit racial preferences like affimative action.

Wrong. These schools would be much more asian than White. Asian Americans are the superiors in the academic space, and white students are only kept in stable numbers because of unmeritocratic bs like extracurricular activities. Across the board, the best students are asian, rarely white european, and even more rarely white american.

America's graduating high school seniors are about 56% white and 8% asian. Asians on average perform better academically but not by so much that 8% would grossly outnumber 56%.

The number of white kids getting 1500+ is about the same as asian kids getting 1500+ on the SAT.

[Anonymous]

Good god, you idiots think standardized tests mean that much? Ok, fine. Let’s just award Nobel prizes based on test scores then. We can also elect presidents this way. And award research grants, writing contracts, etc. Since a multiple choice exam can reveal such grand truths about a person’s intellectual and creative capabilities to achieve things in real life, using standardized test for everything would sure save a lot of effort thought.

The only problem is that standardized tests can’t do all that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

So it’s okay to turn into Europe but not China?

I don’t want either. I don’t want a Gaokao or an a levels system in the US. If you do, that’s…interesting, but I don’t think there’s a massive push to make high school much much harder than it currently is.

Having merit based process and taking away racist considerations is not adopting the Chinese system. And nobody cares what you want or don’t want. You can’t stop it.

? give me a step by step as to how this leads us to a "merit based process." What does merit even look like for you? No top school is choosing solely by top SAT and gpa.

No, meritocracy doesn’t mean SAT and GPA only. But surely it doesn’t include race and sexual orientation etc.

I'd prefer that system. Just scale the SAT to be towards the top 0.01% of students rather than the bottom 50%.

Your kid would miss that by about 50% so I’m not sure why you prefer such a system.

If my kid is only smart enough to get into state school, that's fine. The top schools should adhere to deeply rigorous examination. I don't believe the colleges are meritocratic until they're 70-90% asian.

You are probably thinking of high schools like stuyvesant and TJ before the admissions change. They are drawing from a population that is significantly more asian than america in general.

A reasonable touchstone would be Caltech. They do not engage in racial or gender preferences and while it is mostly just stem, asians do not shy away from stem.
Caltech is less than 50% asian.

tldr There are not enough asians in america to crowd out everyone else to the point of near exclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would hope that we aren’t supporting the idea of being fine with schools discriminating just because the far right mod of to blame everything on DEI. It’s concerning how quickly everyone is forcing the pendulum in the exact opposite direction. People need to accept a bit of balance.

100%. I am against hiring on the basis of race, and therefore I have never been a big fan of affirmative action. But now what I am seeing is that the people crying "racism" against white and asian people are ones who don't mind racism towards black and hispanic people.

Specify what racism? It’s so obvious you’re just pretending to be a moderate.

You're either willfully ignorant or blind.

They lack empathy and are committed to racism above all, just ignore them.

DP

So can you point to any evidence of this racism against blacks and hispanics in college admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

Disagree completely. I’m assuming by DEI you’re referencing affirmative action. White woman weren’t the beneficiaries of affirmative action; they mostly just were allowed to get outcomes commensurate with their skills and abilities. Take a look at the GPA and standardized test scores of white woman; they’re competitive for admissions all on their own; no “action” is necessary.

To be fair, affirmative action was originally about taking affirmative action to remove those barriers.

[Anonymous]

This forum should be renamed to “Pro Trump Discussions” as it’s hard to vote otherwise seeing what a cesspool is in reality 🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would hope that we aren’t supporting the idea of being fine with schools discriminating just because the far right mod of to blame everything on DEI. It’s concerning how quickly everyone is forcing the pendulum in the exact opposite direction. People need to accept a bit of balance.

100%. I am against hiring on the basis of race, and therefore I have never been a big fan of affirmative action. But now what I am seeing is that the people crying "racism" against white and asian people are ones who don't mind racism towards black and hispanic people.

Specify what racism? It’s so obvious you’re just pretending to be a moderate.

You're either willfully ignorant or blind.

They lack empathy and are committed to racism above all, just ignore them.

DP

So can you point to any evidence of this racism against blacks and hispanics in college admissions?

Exactly. Democrats claim it’s only the “other guys” who are racist, & college staff employees are overwhelmingly Democrats. Yet they needed Affirmative Action because all those slobbering racists who work in admissions couldn’t be trusted to treat them equally. It never made any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

Really hope all this DEI crap goes away and we get back to merit/performance. I can’t read the article above.

Fake merit like in the good old days when they discriminated...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

Disagree completely. I’m assuming by DEI you’re referencing affirmative action. White woman weren’t the beneficiaries of affirmative action; they mostly just were allowed to get outcomes commensurate with their skills and abilities. Take a look at the GPA and standardized test scores of white woman; they’re competitive for admissions all on their own; no “action” is necessary.

To be fair, affirmative action was originally about taking affirmative action to remove those barriers.

+1

And those barriers were systemic over centuries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

Disagree completely. I’m assuming by DEI you’re referencing affirmative action. White woman weren’t the beneficiaries of affirmative action; they mostly just were allowed to get outcomes commensurate with their skills and abilities. Take a look at the GPA and standardized test scores of white woman; they’re competitive for admissions all on their own; no “action” is necessary.

Bro, when were you born? White women received exhaustive amounts of handout positions and pipeline initiatives to get into the careers they have today. In tech and various financial firms you still see white women soaring from DEI initiatives. Don't be disingenuous.

Where did men need 200 more points on the SAT than women?