So what is changing? Questions about SC affirmative action decision

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Harvard has already been chickened out, so the number of Asian students has been increasing since the lawsuit.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Now there will be more upward pressure, of course.
It won't be like 70%, but I can see it reaching around 40% at most of the elite to semi-elite schools.

Test-blind, race-blind schools like Caltech and Berkeley are already at that level.

On a side note, around 40% was the level at which schools began to feel uncomfortable with Jews a while ago, thus birth of the holistic BS.

DP: I also think it will be around 35-40%. The plaintiffs and several universities have developed predictive models. URM will drop by 50% on average. At Harvard that would mean that 10% of the seats will be open for white and Asian students, if ALDC and first gen status remain in place. The question will be what proportion of the seats go to Asians vs whites.

More to Whites.

That's the way the system is set up.

Duh.

Check the demographics at Caltech, UCLA, UC Berkeley.

Asian Americans are close to 8% of the U.S. population. California has the highest percentage of Asian Americans ( around 6 million).

Caltech, UCLA, UC Berkeley are California colleges.

Get it?

[Anonymous]

My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

What's your college?
Schools better be very very careful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they keep trying to make diversity a goal, it's not the 90s anymore we should be looking for the best and brightest.

Diversity makes everyone smarter and stronger (mentally). I don't need to be in a class with 30 other people just like me. I want to learn from other people's experiences and perspectives. And I want that for my kids as well. This is true in engineering as well as humanities. You don't know what you haven't lived.

As Thomas noted in his concurrence, nobody (not even Harvard in this case) has been able to explain or quantify any educational benefit from diversity.

And in engineering, diversity is totally irrelevant. The bridge stays up, the plane flies, or not, regardless of the race of the engineer who designed them.

Not true at all.

Also, all the "PC" posters and anti- diversity posts on this site in general lately make me wonder if there aren't some political (maybe paid, maybe just trolling) posters here. Wish we could see who posts again and again.

Some people haven’t completely lost common sense! And they are ready to demonstrate it for free. Not everyone who doesn’t think like you is a troll.
-DP who doesn’t care about diversity in the slightest

Thanks for being a self-righteous a**hole Uncle Cracker!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

What's your college?
Schools better be very very careful.

DP: people keep posting statements like this as if this will somehow change reality. These schools are making a conscious choice. Some will try to find legal workarounds and others will take the risk of litigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

What's your college?
Schools better be very very careful.

DP: people keep posting statements like this as if this will somehow change reality. These schools are making a conscious choice. Some will try to find legal workarounds and others will take the risk of litigation.

Every school had letters ready to go. Most the messages are similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents who are excited about this decision will be disappointed when their kids still don’t get into their dream schools next year. There will be thousands of depressed kids and families starting Dec 15, 2023. Mark my words.

No. There will always be ivy rejects. Those who are rejected have T20. If not T20, T30... This will push PP's kids down to podunk universities. Mark my words.

The schools will do what they want. You can order your kid around, you can't order the colleges to take your kid.

The Asians want the white kids to attend state colleges, and the Asians to attend the top privates - basically, the Asians want segregation - not going to happen.

Again, if only Asians knew US History better.

You're an idiot and race baiter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

What's your college?
Schools better be very very careful.

DP: people keep posting statements like this as if this will somehow change reality. These schools are making a conscious choice. Some will try to find legal workarounds and others will take the risk of litigation.

Every school had letters ready to go. Most the messages are similar.

True, both for my slac and law school. But both are guilty of what Roberts says of the arrogance and ignorance of the university dean They "think" they should be saying X but they really have no stats to back up X. But they say it anyways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

What's your college?
Schools better be very very careful.

Yep. Idiotic to state that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

What's your college?
Schools better be very very careful.

Yep. Idiotic to state that.

As hot button and as new as this decision is- you think they’d be very careful with this next cycle of admissions because people will be ready to throw down lawsuits. I can see as time goes on the workarounds will start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Harvard has already been chickened out, so the number of Asian students has been increasing since the lawsuit.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Now there will be more upward pressure, of course.
It won't be like 70%, but I can see it reaching around 40% at most of the elite to semi-elite schools.

Test-blind, race-blind schools like Caltech and Berkeley are already at that level.

On a side note, around 40% was the level at which schools began to feel uncomfortable with Jews a while ago, thus birth of the holistic BS.

DP: I also think it will be around 35-40%. The plaintiffs and several universities have developed predictive models. URM will drop by 50% on average. At Harvard that would mean that 10% of the seats will be open for white and Asian students, if ALDC and first gen status remain in place. The question will be what proportion of the seats go to Asians vs whites.

More to Whites.

That's the way the system is set up.

Duh.

Check the demographics at Caltech, UCLA, UC Berkeley.

Comparing to CA schools, especially public doesn’t make sense as they don’t have the same ALDC institutional priorities. Also, the percentage of black people is half the national average and the number of Asian people is almost 3 times the national average which will reflect the university demographics.

Michigan is a closer comparison due to state demographics and institutional priorities.

Caltech is private.
It's about 40% Asians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

Can you share the video so we can get a running start on litigation?

[Anonymous]

If your kid cannot get into college on their own merits, they shouldn't be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My college sent out a video message from the president within hours of the decision that basically said nothing is going to change. My guess is that at the top private schools, nothing is going to change. There’s already so much random subjectivity in the process that it’s easy to put whatever you want into the hopper.
It will increase litigation though. As usual, not much changes but a bunch of lawyers get paid. I’m a lawyer.

Can you share the video so we can get a running start on litigation?

DP. Plenty of college president statements are out there on social media. "Nothing is going to change" presumably refers to the result, not the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Harvard has already been chickened out, so the number of Asian students has been increasing since the lawsuit.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Now there will be more upward pressure, of course.
It won't be like 70%, but I can see it reaching around 40% at most of the elite to semi-elite schools.

Test-blind, race-blind schools like Caltech and Berkeley are already at that level.

On a side note, around 40% was the level at which schools began to feel uncomfortable with Jews a while ago, thus birth of the holistic BS.

DP: I also think it will be around 35-40%. The plaintiffs and several universities have developed predictive models. URM will drop by 50% on average. At Harvard that would mean that 10% of the seats will be open for white and Asian students, if ALDC and first gen status remain in place. The question will be what proportion of the seats go to Asians vs whites.

More to Whites.

That's the way the system is set up.

Duh.

Check the demographics at Caltech, UCLA, UC Berkeley.

Comparing to CA schools, especially public doesn’t make sense as they don’t have the same ALDC institutional priorities. Also, the percentage of black people is half the national average and the number of Asian people is almost 3 times the national average which will reflect the university demographics.

Michigan is a closer comparison due to state demographics and institutional priorities.

Caltech is private.
It's about 40% Asians

Before posting read the thread. This was already addressed and explained.