Supreme Court revisits Texas affirmative action in new case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

I don't believe the above for a second. Bullshit. Name? Details?

Why don't you believe it. Even more impressive accomplishments were left out for privacy reasons.

That's bullshit. If you read this thread, you would believe that black students make up 50% of ivy leagues schools, when in fact, it's less then 5%. The reason that kid didn't get in had nothing to do with a black student taking his place. Maybe the kid was weird or a dud.

i read this thread, and never got the impression that black students make up 50% of ivy league schools.

do you BS for fun?

[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:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

Agree. There are plenty of athletes, legacies, and non-black students who do not fit the above same criteria, but still get in.

Seems to me there should be concerned about the high acceptances of international students, as evidenced the article below from CC:


An interesting article at the Wall Street Journal notes that 975,000 international students are enrolled in US colleges and universities this year, up 10% from the year before. Since most of these are full-tuition students, they are attractive prospects for financially strapped US schools. But, it's making it more difficult for US and in-state students to be admitted.

The article focuses on University of California schools, who accepted 62% of in-state applicants last year - down from 84% four years earlier.

According to the article, the UC schools are the most affected. Most other state schools have held in-state admissions steady. (The article doesn't describe the effect on out-of-state US students. Presumably, a full-pay international student might be more desirable than a domestic student who would need financial aid.)

Declining state subsidies in California, UC administrators say, make it necessary to admit more full-pay international students to keep in-state tuition low.

More: http://www.wsj.com/articles/foreign-students-pinch-university-of-california-home-state-admissions-1447650060

PP, it's the precise opposite. If we truly believe in the educational benefits of diversity, we need to bring in MANY MORE international students. 975,000 international students is but a token. I want my kids exposed to how the Chinese think, how Arabs speak, how Latin Americans dance, how Germans plan.

If you prefer a chauvinist approach ("only American students matter"), you are of course entitled to say so, but please add clarify that you don't really give a sh*t about diversity.

I fully believe that American universities should first educate American citizens. An educated citizenry benefits our education just as our first responsibility is jobs for our citizens not jobs for the world.

Very well said, and you prove my point: you don't believe in the supposed "educational benefits of diversity"

I fully believe that taxpayer dollars (and yes, taxpayer dollars do go to higher education) should first benefit our citizenry. That does not mean I am opposed to diversity. However, an educated populace should be our first goal, not educating others to benefit their populace at the expense of ours.

Sorry, I guess I should be a bit more clear.

Defenders of affirmative action often justify it on the basis that diversity is good for ALL the students in the classroom -- those are the so-called educational benefits of diversity.

They are saying diversity is good, even imperative, for the mainstream 90-95% of students admitted not because of AA (plus, of course, for the 5-10% admitted through AA).

Now, if you truly believe that, then you must advocate for MORE, not fewer, international students. They'd bring real diversity, which should be good for ALL the students in the classroom.

You don't even know your own history and you want to bring international students. If you did, you would not be adamant over 4% of black students at UT. Read Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen and then come back with an intelligent comment.

[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:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

Agree. There are plenty of athletes, legacies, and non-black students who do not fit the above same criteria, but still get in.

Seems to me there should be concerned about the high acceptances of international students, as evidenced the article below from CC:


An interesting article at the Wall Street Journal notes that 975,000 international students are enrolled in US colleges and universities this year, up 10% from the year before. Since most of these are full-tuition students, they are attractive prospects for financially strapped US schools. But, it's making it more difficult for US and in-state students to be admitted.

The article focuses on University of California schools, who accepted 62% of in-state applicants last year - down from 84% four years earlier.

According to the article, the UC schools are the most affected. Most other state schools have held in-state admissions steady. (The article doesn't describe the effect on out-of-state US students. Presumably, a full-pay international student might be more desirable than a domestic student who would need financial aid.)

Declining state subsidies in California, UC administrators say, make it necessary to admit more full-pay international students to keep in-state tuition low.

More: http://www.wsj.com/articles/foreign-students-pinch-university-of-california-home-state-admissions-1447650060

PP, it's the precise opposite. If we truly believe in the educational benefits of diversity, we need to bring in MANY MORE international students. 975,000 international students is but a token. I want my kids exposed to how the Chinese think, how Arabs speak, how Latin Americans dance, how Germans plan.

If you prefer a chauvinist approach ("only American students matter"), you are of course entitled to say so, but please add clarify that you don't really give a sh*t about diversity.

I fully believe that American universities should first educate American citizens. An educated citizenry benefits our education just as our first responsibility is jobs for our citizens not jobs for the world.

Very well said, and you prove my point: you don't believe in the supposed "educational benefits of diversity"

I fully believe that taxpayer dollars (and yes, taxpayer dollars do go to higher education) should first benefit our citizenry. That does not mean I am opposed to diversity. However, an educated populace should be our first goal, not educating others to benefit their populace at the expense of ours.

Sorry, I guess I should be a bit more clear.

Defenders of affirmative action often justify it on the basis that diversity is good for ALL the students in the classroom -- those are the so-called educational benefits of diversity.

They are saying diversity is good, even imperative, for the mainstream 90-95% of students admitted not because of AA (plus, of course, for the 5-10% admitted through AA).

Now, if you truly believe that, then you must advocate for MORE, not fewer, international students. They'd bring real diversity, which should be good for ALL the students in the classroom.

You don't even know your own history and you want to bring international students. If you did, you would not be adamant over 4% of black students at UT. Read Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen and then come back with an intelligent comment.

read the Bible, or Kalama Sutta, or Man's search for meaning, or In praise of folly, and please come back with an intelligent comment. who the f#ck cares about some James Loewen other than an ignorant American like you?

[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:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

Agree. There are plenty of athletes, legacies, and non-black students who do not fit the above same criteria, but still get in.

Seems to me there should be concerned about the high acceptances of international students, as evidenced the article below from CC:


An interesting article at the Wall Street Journal notes that 975,000 international students are enrolled in US colleges and universities this year, up 10% from the year before. Since most of these are full-tuition students, they are attractive prospects for financially strapped US schools. But, it's making it more difficult for US and in-state students to be admitted.

The article focuses on University of California schools, who accepted 62% of in-state applicants last year - down from 84% four years earlier.

According to the article, the UC schools are the most affected. Most other state schools have held in-state admissions steady. (The article doesn't describe the effect on out-of-state US students. Presumably, a full-pay international student might be more desirable than a domestic student who would need financial aid.)

Declining state subsidies in California, UC administrators say, make it necessary to admit more full-pay international students to keep in-state tuition low.

More: http://www.wsj.com/articles/foreign-students-pinch-university-of-california-home-state-admissions-1447650060

PP, it's the precise opposite. If we truly believe in the educational benefits of diversity, we need to bring in MANY MORE international students. 975,000 international students is but a token. I want my kids exposed to how the Chinese think, how Arabs speak, how Latin Americans dance, how Germans plan.

If you prefer a chauvinist approach ("only American students matter"), you are of course entitled to say so, but please add clarify that you don't really give a sh*t about diversity.

I fully believe that American universities should first educate American citizens. An educated citizenry benefits our education just as our first responsibility is jobs for our citizens not jobs for the world.

Very well said, and you prove my point: you don't believe in the supposed "educational benefits of diversity"

I fully believe that taxpayer dollars (and yes, taxpayer dollars do go to higher education) should first benefit our citizenry. That does not mean I am opposed to diversity. However, an educated populace should be our first goal, not educating others to benefit their populace at the expense of ours.

Sorry, I guess I should be a bit more clear.

Defenders of affirmative action often justify it on the basis that diversity is good for ALL the students in the classroom -- those are the so-called educational benefits of diversity.

They are saying diversity is good, even imperative, for the mainstream 90-95% of students admitted not because of AA (plus, of course, for the 5-10% admitted through AA).

Now, if you truly believe that, then you must advocate for MORE, not fewer, international students. They'd bring real diversity, which should be good for ALL the students in the classroom.

You don't even know your own history and you want to bring international students. If you did, you would not be adamant over 4% of black students at UT. Read Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen and then come back with an intelligent comment.

read the Bible, or Kalama Sutta, or Man's search for meaning, or In praise of folly, and please come back with an intelligent comment. who the f#ck cares about some James Loewen other than an ignorant American like you?

I have no interest in the bible. It's funny, you tell me to go read it, then you ask "who the fuck cares" and call me an ignorant America. LOL! I have no interest in the bible if you are it's example. You seriously don't know American History. It's clear. Most American's don't. Christians make Agnostics run like hell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

Reading this I wonder a) if the kid applied to the right schools for him/her and 2) if who the kid is and what he wants out of life came across. I see an excellent student, then a long list of leadership positions, writing awards and research experiences before we even get to the excellent clubs and ECs. If he's sort of a jack of all trades with no clear passion, there are too many kids like this applying to all schools.

You conveniently dismissed the part where where the black student would have been admitted -- even as a jack-of-all trades and no clear passion.

Can someone tell me where all of these black students are going? Imaginary US Ivy? The actual numbers are incredibly low. Is this just a good tag line for you to hold on to like guns? I'm sure it's easier for kid from Alaska or Idaho to get into an ivy then anyone. When kids from Fairfax Cty don't get into UVA (which they don't), they don't blame the black kids. It's those damn Roanoke kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless the outcome, private colleges like Harvard, Princeton, etc, will continue holistic admissions. Good for them.

Private universities may be affected and (bound) by the US Supreme Court ruling since they receive federal funds from the Federal Government unless they give up all federal funds.

I think it's time to end this racial discrimination based on race. This is shameful and unconstitutional to allow racial discrimination to continue. All citizens are guaranteed equal protection under the law.

So what do we do about the fact that with few exceptions the standards for admissions for a white male and lower than they are for a white female. The rationale is that colleges prefer gender parity for a variety of reasons. But is that fair to girls? I think it's time to end discrimination based on gender. It is shameful. All citizens are guaranteed equal protections under the law. And please don't ask me to cite sources. Look it up yourself.

Depends on the criteria used. Grades? Yes. SAT scores? No. In any case, the differences are slight compared to racial preferences.

No, girls and Asians (boys and girls) have both higher grades and SAT scores than white boys in general. Why do white boys get a pass? If a meritocracy is so damned important to people then they shouldn't be so quick to drop it when it comes to white boys. This is anecdotal but several boys in my daughter's classes at a SLAC have come right out and said if they were a girl they would have never be admitted. Tell a girl who had been weeded out based on gender that the differences are slight. Time for lazy white boys to face the music.

Not true. White males have higher SAT scores than white females by about 40 points. There are almost twice as many males with SAT math scores above 700, and slightly more with Reading scores above 700. Females have higher grades. All the details are here:

http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/2013/TotalGroup-2013.pdf

You need to look at scores based on individual colleges and universities. Looking at the "total group" is an odd way to look at admission odds for a particular institution. Look at the common data set for a specific college (under institutional research on the college/university website) and you'll see a different story. At most schools admitted girls have higher scores than admitted boys. Not all, but most.

I believe this. When my son was getting ready for apps, a friend with a son told me that my son would get into a great school - he's not competing against the girls, just the other boys. According to my college counselor, girls scores are higher. Boys are given more breaks. We must demand that this STOPS NOW!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless the outcome, private colleges like Harvard, Princeton, etc, will continue holistic admissions. Good for them.

Private universities may be affected and (bound) by the US Supreme Court ruling since they receive federal funds from the Federal Government unless they give up all federal funds.

I think it's time to end this racial discrimination based on race. This is shameful and unconstitutional to allow racial discrimination to continue. All citizens are guaranteed equal protection under the law.

So what do we do about the fact that with few exceptions the standards for admissions for a white male and lower than they are for a white female. The rationale is that colleges prefer gender parity for a variety of reasons. But is that fair to girls? I think it's time to end discrimination based on gender. It is shameful. All citizens are guaranteed equal protections under the law. And please don't ask me to cite sources. Look it up yourself.

Depends on the criteria used. Grades? Yes. SAT scores? No. In any case, the differences are slight compared to racial preferences.

No, girls and Asians (boys and girls) have both higher grades and SAT scores than white boys in general. Why do white boys get a pass? If a meritocracy is so damned important to people then they shouldn't be so quick to drop it when it comes to white boys. This is anecdotal but several boys in my daughter's classes at a SLAC have come right out and said if they were a girl they would have never be admitted. Tell a girl who had been weeded out based on gender that the differences are slight. Time for lazy white boys to face the music.

Not true. White males have higher SAT scores than white females by about 40 points. There are almost twice as many males with SAT math scores above 700, and slightly more with Reading scores above 700. Females have higher grades. All the details are here:

http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/2013/TotalGroup-2013.pdf

You need to look at scores based on individual colleges and universities. Looking at the "total group" is an odd way to look at admission odds for a particular institution. Look at the common data set for a specific college (under institutional research on the college/university website) and you'll see a different story. At most schools admitted girls have higher scores than admitted boys. Not all, but most.

I believe this. When my son was getting ready for apps, a friend with a son told me that my son would get into a great school - he's not competing against the girls, just the other boys. According to my college counselor, girls scores are higher. Boys are given more breaks. We must demand that this STOPS NOW!

Right now it is happening to insure diversity. All of the programs that have been instituted for girls without similar programs for boys has dramatically increased the number of females in college and a reduction in male students. There is a push not to up the number of male students. Social engineering always has unwanted consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless the outcome, private colleges like Harvard, Princeton, etc, will continue holistic admissions. Good for them.

Private universities may be affected and (bound) by the US Supreme Court ruling since they receive federal funds from the Federal Government unless they give up all federal funds.

I think it's time to end this racial discrimination based on race. This is shameful and unconstitutional to allow racial discrimination to continue. All citizens are guaranteed equal protection under the law.

So what do we do about the fact that with few exceptions the standards for admissions for a white male and lower than they are for a white female. The rationale is that colleges prefer gender parity for a variety of reasons. But is that fair to girls? I think it's time to end discrimination based on gender. It is shameful. All citizens are guaranteed equal protections under the law. And please don't ask me to cite sources. Look it up yourself.

Depends on the criteria used. Grades? Yes. SAT scores? No. In any case, the differences are slight compared to racial preferences.

No, girls and Asians (boys and girls) have both higher grades and SAT scores than white boys in general. Why do white boys get a pass? If a meritocracy is so damned important to people then they shouldn't be so quick to drop it when it comes to white boys. This is anecdotal but several boys in my daughter's classes at a SLAC have come right out and said if they were a girl they would have never be admitted. Tell a girl who had been weeded out based on gender that the differences are slight. Time for lazy white boys to face the music.

Not true. White males have higher SAT scores than white females by about 40 points. There are almost twice as many males with SAT math scores above 700, and slightly more with Reading scores above 700. Females have higher grades. All the details are here:

http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/2013/TotalGroup-2013.pdf

You need to look at scores based on individual colleges and universities. Looking at the "total group" is an odd way to look at admission odds for a particular institution. Look at the common data set for a specific college (under institutional research on the college/university website) and you'll see a different story. At most schools admitted girls have higher scores than admitted boys. Not all, but most.

I believe this. When my son was getting ready for apps, a friend with a son told me that my son would get into a great school - he's not competing against the girls, just the other boys. According to my college counselor, girls scores are higher. Boys are given more breaks. We must demand that this STOPS NOW!

unless it is caltech, mit, cmu cs, stanford or any other stem rockstar school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

I don't believe the above for a second. Bullshit. Name? Details?

Why don't you believe it. Even more impressive accomplishments were left out for privacy reasons.

That's bullshit. If you read this thread, you would believe that black students make up 50% of ivy leagues schools, when in fact, it's less then 5%. The reason that kid didn't get in had nothing to do with a black student taking his place. Maybe the kid was weird or a dud.

It is not bullshit. There are many cases where extremely qualified applicants are rejected by top schools if they lack any "hooks". The top schools (except maybe Caltech, Berkeley and Michigan) accept only about 10-15% of the applicants based on merit. Rest of the students are accepted under legacy, sports, URM, connections etc. It's a corrupt system. At least 50% of the acceptances should be based on merit.

[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:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

I don't believe the above for a second. Bullshit. Name? Details?

Why don't you believe it. Even more impressive accomplishments were left out for privacy reasons.

That's bullshit. If you read this thread, you would believe that black students make up 50% of ivy leagues schools, when in fact, it's less then 5%. The reason that kid didn't get in had nothing to do with a black student taking his place. Maybe the kid was weird or a dud.

It is not bullshit. There are many cases where extremely qualified applicants are rejected by top schools if they lack any "hooks". The top schools (except maybe Caltech, Berkeley and Michigan) accept only about 10-15% of the applicants based on merit. Rest of the students are accepted under legacy, sports, URM, connections etc. It's a corrupt system. At least 50% of the acceptances should be based on merit.

College admission is all about hooks - even as a black student. A middle of the road black student who plays basketball is not getting in. A black student who speaks latin and is the captain of the lacross team is getting in. It's about hooks across the board. I don't think that will ever change or they will get the same boring students.

[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:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

Agree. There are plenty of athletes, legacies, and non-black students who do not fit the above same criteria, but still get in.

Seems to me there should be concerned about the high acceptances of international students, as evidenced the article below from CC:


An interesting article at the Wall Street Journal notes that 975,000 international students are enrolled in US colleges and universities this year, up 10% from the year before. Since most of these are full-tuition students, they are attractive prospects for financially strapped US schools. But, it's making it more difficult for US and in-state students to be admitted.

The article focuses on University of California schools, who accepted 62% of in-state applicants last year - down from 84% four years earlier.

According to the article, the UC schools are the most affected. Most other state schools have held in-state admissions steady. (The article doesn't describe the effect on out-of-state US students. Presumably, a full-pay international student might be more desirable than a domestic student who would need financial aid.)

Declining state subsidies in California, UC administrators say, make it necessary to admit more full-pay international students to keep in-state tuition low.

More: http://www.wsj.com/articles/foreign-students-pinch-university-of-california-home-state-admissions-1447650060

PP, it's the precise opposite. If we truly believe in the educational benefits of diversity, we need to bring in MANY MORE international students. 975,000 international students is but a token. I want my kids exposed to how the Chinese think, how Arabs speak, how Latin Americans dance, how Germans plan.

If you prefer a chauvinist approach ("only American students matter"), you are of course entitled to say so, but please add clarify that you don't really give a sh*t about diversity.

I fully believe that American universities should first educate American citizens. An educated citizenry benefits our education just as our first responsibility is jobs for our citizens not jobs for the world.

Very well said, and you prove my point: you don't believe in the supposed "educational benefits of diversity"

I fully believe that taxpayer dollars (and yes, taxpayer dollars do go to higher education) should first benefit our citizenry. That does not mean I am opposed to diversity. However, an educated populace should be our first goal, not educating others to benefit their populace at the expense of ours.

...but the number are so low, it's not at your expense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I personally know of at least 4 people (educated, upper middle class, normally Hillary voters) who are planning to vote for TRUMP. They have had it up to here with what they regard as URM/affirmative action bullshit. They see "meh" kids of black Big Law partners easily getting into selective colleges when other kids with much more stellar records are being rejected. White-skinned kids whose families have recently discovered their 25% Hispanic "heritage" are doing very well in early college acceptances also. You can't blame folks for playing a good hand, but the whole URM preference thing has become absurd. Other parents are tired of their kids being screwed.

A partner of any races' kids are getting in. I am a black lawyer with a "meh" son. I went to big law partner friends (white women partners) and asked them what they did with their "meh" sons. They gave me the name of a pretty expensive private college counselor ($7K) and told me how this person got their kids into top tier schools (including ivys). We hired him. We are in the process, so I don't know how it will turn out. However, I can tell you that you can indeed pay to make sure your kid looks like the perfect student for a particular school. This counselor has managed EVERY STEP OF THE PROCESS including clubs, classes and outside activities.

All that to say, again, any partner's kids are getting in. I know MANY mediocre white kids who go to amazing colleges. I also know brilliant kids who didn't get into any top tier colleges. At the heart of it, all poor kids are at a disadvantage.

[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:...and, in addition to that, studies have shown that grades are more indicative of success then test scores.

If you're interested in how well test score predict college performance:

http://www.isironline.org/isir-2015-invited-address-paul-sackett-nathan-kuncel/

They have a dataset that show that test scores predict academic performance quite well, and do so regardless of race, SES and gender. The sample size was 1.2 million college students.

This has been refuted. High SAT scores are correlated to high SES. When I get a moment, I will post. Especially, when it comes to LSAT and bar passage rates.

No, this hasn't been refuted. It's a brand new study with 1.2 million participants (college board data). Most of other studies were very small sample size or were manipulated to get the results the author wanted. Watch the presentation, it's very illuminating.

What will it prove? That only kids with high SAT scores should go to college? That only a subset of our population deserve to be there? That colleges should only use test scores for admission? That our society is better if we only employ people who scored well? Please - illuminate me.

Yes? Do you think everybody is college material?

Depends on the race.

Non-black applicant with 2370 SAT, 4.0 and 4.6 gpa, 12+ APs all 5s, 800 on all subject tests, sport, orchestra, 2 major leadership positions, extensive volunteering, original research at University, internships at research labs, writing award and writing tutor, 3 foreign languages, excellent clubs and ECs, excellent LORs etc. denied to all colleges except one. Low SES with no advantages.

A black applicant with the above qualifications would have been admitted to all of the colleges. Depends on the race.

I don't believe the above for a second. Bullshit. Name? Details?

Why don't you believe it. Even more impressive accomplishments were left out for privacy reasons.

That's bullshit. If you read this thread, you would believe that black students make up 50% of ivy leagues schools, when in fact, it's less then 5%. The reason that kid didn't get in had nothing to do with a black student taking his place. Maybe the kid was weird or a dud.

It is not bullshit. There are many cases where extremely qualified applicants are rejected by top schools if they lack any "hooks". The top schools (except maybe Caltech, Berkeley and Michigan) accept only about 10-15% of the applicants based on merit. Rest of the students are accepted under legacy, sports, URM, connections etc. It's a corrupt system. At least 50% of the acceptances should be based on merit.

College admission is all about hooks - even as a black student. A middle of the road black student who plays basketball is not getting in. A black student who speaks latin and is the captain of the lacross team is getting in. It's about hooks across the board. I don't think that will ever change or they will get the same boring students.

Actually they get tons of boring students right now - how many elite black rappers, producers, entertainers, etc go to the ivy league? none - most of the blacks in the ivy league are ultra boring or basic blipster types.

If private schools want to make it about 'interesting' kids, they would never have the mix they have now.

elite privates are filled with super boring risk-averse kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally know of at least 4 people (educated, upper middle class, normally Hillary voters) who are planning to vote for TRUMP. They have had it up to here with what they regard as URM/affirmative action bullshit. They see "meh" kids of black Big Law partners easily getting into selective colleges when other kids with much more stellar records are being rejected. White-skinned kids whose families have recently discovered their 25% Hispanic "heritage" are doing very well in early college acceptances also. You can't blame folks for playing a good hand, but the whole URM preference thing has become absurd. Other parents are tired of their kids being screwed.

A partner of any races' kids are getting in. I am a black lawyer with a "meh" son. I went to big law partner friends (white women partners) and asked them what they did with their "meh" sons. They gave me the name of a pretty expensive private college counselor ($7K) and told me how this person got their kids into top tier schools (including ivys). We hired him. We are in the process, so I don't know how it will turn out. However, I can tell you that you can indeed pay to make sure your kid looks like the perfect student for a particular school. This counselor has managed EVERY STEP OF THE PROCESS including clubs, classes and outside activities.

All that to say, again, any partner's kids are getting in. I know MANY mediocre white kids who go to amazing colleges. I also know brilliant kids who didn't get into any top tier colleges. At the heart of it, all poor kids are at a disadvantage.

however then when policies put forward for SES-only affirmative action, URMs yell and scream. What's your personal stance on that?

[Anonymous]

Again why so preoccupied by the black students? Why so virulent?