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:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Holistic admissions. Test scores are not the be all/end all that folks think they are.

So we're pretending that the Harvard personality scores that were shown to be lower across the board for asians are just causal racism and not a way to dock asian applicants in order to boost diversity? Or do you believe that Asian kids really do have inferior personalities?

My white kid is one of 12 kids in the advanced math track at her very intense private school. 10 of 12 are Asian. The kids in this track routinely text about math homework problems all Friday and Saturday evenings. All evening long.
There are only so many hours in the week and everyone gets the same number. If you are working on math and other homework every weekend night, you aren't socializing in the same way that other high school kids do who are hanging out with friends and other kids every Friday and Saturday night. These kids are spending 4 years honing their social skills instead of maximizing their academic knowledge.
This is super generalization but there is something to it. My kid is seeing it play out.

Wow. There is so much wrong with what you have written. Starting with a big lol at the idea that less academically inclined kids are “honing their social skills” in a way superior to kids who have shared academic interests in common. I believe that you do t know it but your post is frankly racist.

If this is juniors in an intense Big 3’s advanced math series, you are wrong. Plenty of partying over the weekend by some of the Asian kids in the class. Maybe your white kid isn’t part of the party scene.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Holistic admissions. Test scores are not the be all/end all that folks think they are.

So we're pretending that the Harvard personality scores that were shown to be lower across the board for asians are just causal racism and not a way to dock asian applicants in order to boost diversity? Or do you believe that Asian kids really do have inferior personalities?

My white kid is one of 12 kids in the advanced math track at her very intense private school. 10 of 12 are Asian. The kids in this track routinely text about math homework problems all Friday and Saturday evenings. All evening long.
There are only so many hours in the week and everyone gets the same number. If you are working on math and other homework every weekend night, you aren't socializing in the same way that other high school kids do who are hanging out with friends and other kids every Friday and Saturday night. These kids are spending 4 years honing their social skills instead of maximizing their academic knowledge.
This is super generalization but there is something to it. My kid is seeing it play out.

Wow. There is so much wrong with what you have written. Starting with a big lol at the idea that less academically inclined kids are “honing their social skills” in a way superior to kids who have shared academic interests in common. I believe that you do t know it but your post is frankly racist.

If this is juniors in an intense Big 3’s advanced math series, you are wrong. Plenty of partying over the weekend by some of the Asian kids in the class. Maybe your white kid isn’t part of the party scene.

Your post makes no sense. The prior post was racist and you are an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

It sounds so stpuid a kid born in 2023 is affected by the slavery of his/her slave ancestors.

Yes, stupid and very sad that this is true.

How is the kid affected by slavery today?

I wrote quite a bit about the impacts of slavery that are still very much with us — and I erased it all. Instead, I’ll flip it.

If your parents or grandparents or great great grandparents came to this country in search of a better life — and actually found one, how does this affect kids in your family today?

Do you think Blacks in the US today would have been better if their ancestors stayed in somewhere Africa so they are in Africa today?

[Anonymous]

Why can’t they just put on the application “were your ancestors even enslaved in the United States”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

It sounds so stpuid a kid born in 2023 is affected by the slavery of his/her slave ancestors.

Yes, stupid and very sad that this is true.

How is the kid affected by slavery today?

I wrote quite a bit about the impacts of slavery that are still very much with us — and I erased it all. Instead, I’ll flip it.

If your parents or grandparents or great great grandparents came to this country in search of a better life — and actually found one, how does this affect kids in your family today?

Except just one generation ago, first gen meant absolutely nothing in admissions.

You reap what you sow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

It sounds so stpuid a kid born in 2023 is affected by the slavery of his/her slave ancestors.

Yes, stupid and very sad that this is true.

How is the kid affected by slavery today?

I wrote quite a bit about the impacts of slavery that are still very much with us — and I erased it all. Instead, I’ll flip it.

If your parents or grandparents or great great grandparents came to this country in search of a better life — and actually found one, how does this affect kids in your family today?

Do you think Blacks in the US today would have been better if their ancestors stayed in somewhere Africa so they are in Africa today?

Unlikely but choice matters. I wonder if we asked today, many from African countries would volunteer to come here as slaves.

[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:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Holistic admissions. Test scores are not the be all/end all that folks think they are.

So we're pretending that the Harvard personality scores that were shown to be lower across the board for asians are just causal racism and not a way to dock asian applicants in order to boost diversity? Or do you believe that Asian kids really do have inferior personalities?

This is a false premise. There is no diversity gain from decreasing the number of Asians students when it is primarily white students who are losing ground in admissions.

Admissions is zero sum. If it weren't for the personality scores, the Harvard student body would be far more Asian American

Only if test scores were the only admission criteria. Clearly, that is not the case. It's really hard for some people to accept that their excellent test scores can only get them so far. So is life.

Of course not, you have the personality score to insert racist biases. It's more necessary than ever now that Asian American students are realizing that ECs matter.

All that racism but Asian students make up approximately 30% of Harvard's student population. Oh the humanity and entitlement!

Is that correct? What would the percentage need to be for the Asian American's who don't get in to accept the outcome?

They want 100% admission.

It's never about percentage.
No individual should be discriminated based on race.
Period.

You would be ok if it were 100% Asian males?

Are you ok with racial discrimination?
Besides, there are schools with 100 females and 90% Blacks.

You still need to prove racial discrimination.

Its being proved in the Supreme Court

[Anonymous]

People trapped in poor countries want out and take chances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

It sounds so stpuid a kid born in 2023 is affected by the slavery of his/her slave ancestors.

Yes, stupid and very sad that this is true.

How is the kid affected by slavery today?

I wrote quite a bit about the impacts of slavery that are still very much with us — and I erased it all. Instead, I’ll flip it.

If your parents or grandparents or great great grandparents came to this country in search of a better life — and actually found one, how does this affect kids in your family today?

Do you think Blacks in the US today would have been better if their ancestors stayed in somewhere Africa so they are in Africa today?

Wait. Are you trying to rationalize slavery? WTF?

[Anonymous]

I'm guessing most poor Americans can get good jobs overseas with their passport's galore and power of good english speaking skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

"Of 35,000 applicants competing for 1,600 spots in the class of 2019, 2,700 had perfect verbal SAT scores; 3,400 had perfect math SAT scores; more than 8,000 had perfect GPAs."

From the facts in the actual case. Now what?

Somethings happening with the SAT that there are that many perfect scores. There used to be that many scoring over 700.

I’m not sure what time periods your comparing, but one issue is that more people are deliberately prepared for the SATs, and more people are spending more time — both in and outside of school — preparing for them. Many years ago, outside perhaps some of prep-schools, most students just took the tests one time, with zero specific preparation. The thought, then, was that the SATs reflected ability more than the predictable results of a decade or more of coaching.

tldr: more kids being coached means more kids with higher—and even perfect — scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

"Of 35,000 applicants competing for 1,600 spots in the class of 2019, 2,700 had perfect verbal SAT scores; 3,400 had perfect math SAT scores; more than 8,000 had perfect GPAs."

From the facts in the actual case. Now what?

Somethings happening with the SAT that there are that many perfect scores. There used to be that many scoring over 700.

I’m not sure what time periods your comparing, but one issue is that more people are deliberately prepared for the SATs, and more people are spending more time — both in and outside of school — preparing for them. Many years ago, outside perhaps some of prep-schools, most students just took the tests one time, with zero specific preparation. The thought, then, was that the SATs reflected ability more than the predictable results of a decade or more of coaching.

tldr: more kids being coached means more kids with higher—and even perfect — scores.

The tests have been recentered using a much larger population of test-takers. Average scores are significantly higher because of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

It sounds so stpuid a kid born in 2023 is affected by the slavery of his/her slave ancestors.

Yes, stupid and very sad that this is true.

How is the kid affected by slavery today?

I wrote quite a bit about the impacts of slavery that are still very much with us — and I erased it all. Instead, I’ll flip it.

If your parents or grandparents or great great grandparents came to this country in search of a better life — and actually found one, how does this affect kids in your family today?

Do you think Blacks in the US today would have been better if their ancestors stayed in somewhere Africa so they are in Africa today?

Wait. Are you trying to rationalize slavery? WTF?

Nope. It's something happened in the history.
I just don't understand the slavery argument for Blacks born in the 21st century in the US

[Anonymous]

Harvard is going to lose. Deservedly so. Amazing how many Asian kids over the years just didn’t have that winsome personality score that other applicants had. Truly a mystery wrapped inside a racist enigma.

Raced based admissions is a joke on every level. Go look up the highest achieving races in America and see what you find. They ain’t white. Trying to frame race based admissions being overturned as the white man keeping people down is ludicrous and an insult to the intelligence of anyone with functional brain cells.

Harvard didn’t screw over Asian kids so that more people from Compton could be admitted. If anyone thinks that for real, I am surprised they can tie their own shoelaces. It was and will be forever a way to protect the admits they wanted to admit. Hint: Not kids from Compton.

A system that treats an Appalachian white kid as privileged and a Nigerian mineral heir as oppressed is absurd and evil. If Harvard or any of these other ridiculous preening universities truly cared, they would pour hundreds of millions into k-12 schooling for economically disadvantaged kids across the country. But they don’t and they won’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

It sounds so stpuid a kid born in 2023 is affected by the slavery of his/her slave ancestors.

Yes, stupid and very sad that this is true.

How is the kid affected by slavery today?

I wrote quite a bit about the impacts of slavery that are still very much with us — and I erased it all. Instead, I’ll flip it.

If your parents or grandparents or great great grandparents came to this country in search of a better life — and actually found one, how does this affect kids in your family today?

Do you think Blacks in the US today would have been better if their ancestors stayed in somewhere Africa so they are in Africa today?

Wait. Are you trying to rationalize slavery? WTF?

Sometimes DCUM ventures into reddit or discord territory.

Sad.