Race in college admissions is back in front of the Supreme Court Oral Argument on Oct. 31 (Monday)

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:A lot of it is “legalized” cheating. I grew up in NY.

My Asian friends parents sent them to Cram schools in summer. They actually request the books for next school year then spend 40 hours a week all summer studying.

They had pros helping with Essay, SAT tutors. Many their focus was just homework. And they worked as a group helping each other.

Compared to me. I worked 20 hours a week in HS, had chores. SAT was a book I took out of library. Paid SAT and college fees my self no help. Most of childhood slept in living room as did not even a bedroom so no place to study.

But how do you compare GPAs and SATs scores. Could my Asian class mate done any better than me.

I got lucky and a college had a program for disadvantaged students with potential and I got on. I recall a fellow student was appalled I needed under a certain HS GPA and SAT score to qualify. He said unfair I got in by having a GPA under a random number. Ironically how is it fair he got in with a GPA over a random number? That guy ended up moving near me in my 40s, we both graduated college, got similar household incomes and similar jobs,

Basing admittance on a random number is silly. Holistic approach is better.



Holistic approach is good.
However what makes you think that you would be better in other extra areas such as ECs, Awards, Essay, Reasearch, etc than those
Asian kids.

Based on what you said, they are probably overall better on those areas as well.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:This thread is too long to read, but my opinion is that AA should be removed because it always makes the minorities "less than". I mean that they are always perceived to have been given an unfair leg up and the perception (often incorrect) is that they were only admitted because they were Black etc. Many of these kids are equally as smart as other kids and don not deserve any kind of asterix next to their name.
I think the playing field should be level so it is known that everyone there has earned their spot. Maybe AA was required years ago when there really was a different in opportunity but now there are so many qualified minorities and access to testing materials is free (Khan Academy) for anyone who wants it, so I don't think AA is required anymore. It is outdated in my opinion and I actually think it does more damage than good by being divisive.


So “the playing field should be level” when it comes to entering college — although the playing fields are far from “level” prior to that point. I guess that will work out quite well for those who’ve been privileged all along.

Bitter laugh. I’m not even sure where to begin here. “Divisive”? Is that “divisive” and “damaging” like the legacies of centuries of systematic discrimination? That kind of divisive? Or were you thinking of some OTHER type of “divisive” and “damage”?






Have Asians treated any better for the past like 100 years?


I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. I’m not even sure YOU’RE sure what you’re trying to say here.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:“The study, published earlier this month in the National Bureau of Economic Research, found that 43 percent of white students admitted to Harvard University were recruited athletes, legacy students, children of faculty and staff, or on the dean’s interest list — applicants whose parents or relatives have donated to Harvard.”

“The study also found that roughly 75 percent of the white students admitted from those four categories, labeled 'ALDCs' in the study, “would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs,” the study said.“

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-harvard-finds-43-percent-white-students-are-legacy-athletes-n1060361


WTF is Dean's interest list.

Totally fukced up system


Rich people, famous people, politicians’ kids, etc. People they feel will increase the profile of the institution.
It’s silly but you are crazy if you think everyone gets into these institutions on the basis of “academic merit”. It is messed up, which is part of the reason I do not get the Ivy worship.


Agree! Most students who leave with a job hook are the ones who came in with an admission hook. Meaning the average smart ambitious person doesn’t have much of leg up by simply attending the school. (But people assume they will, hence the incessant drive to get there.)
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:All the categories that help or are likely to help Republicans (geographic diversity, viewpoint diversity, economic diversity, legacies) will be preserved.

This Supreme Court could not be more transparent in its quest to come out on the Republican side on every issue


You think Ivy League legacies are primarily the children of Republicans? LOL.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:“The study, published earlier this month in the National Bureau of Economic Research, found that 43 percent of white students admitted to Harvard University were recruited athletes, legacy students, children of faculty and staff, or on the dean’s interest list — applicants whose parents or relatives have donated to Harvard.”

“The study also found that roughly 75 percent of the white students admitted from those four categories, labeled 'ALDCs' in the study, “would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs,” the study said.“

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-harvard-finds-43-percent-white-students-are-legacy-athletes-n1060361


WTF is Dean's interest list.

Totally fukced up system


Rich people, famous people, politicians’ kids, etc. People they feel will increase the profile of the institution.
It’s silly but you are crazy if you think everyone gets into these institutions on the basis of “academic merit”. It is messed up, which is part of the reason I do not get the Ivy worship.


And you’re imagining that only Ivys do this? Trying to remember those parents who got caught in that cheating scandal….
Anonymous
Nothing says the schools have to pick their students based on academic merit alone. It's not a simple GPA/standardized test score combo that is required to gain admission.

Athletes - If the schools choose to have athletic teams as an activity, why not fill them with decent players? Not shocking. Is a talented musician, academic team member, or speech/debate team member necessarily superior to or more valuable than a talented athlete under a holistic admissions approach?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Nothing says the schools have to pick their students based on academic merit alone. It's not a simple GPA/standardized test score combo that is required to gain admission.

Athletes - If the schools choose to have athletic teams as an activity, why not fill them with decent players? Not shocking. Is a talented musician, academic team member, or speech/debate team member necessarily superior to or more valuable than a talented athlete under a holistic admissions approach?


Except that holistic admission shouldn’t be making you check Race Box and using that to discriminate based on race?
Anonymous
Just gonna leave this here.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:A lot of it is “legalized” cheating. I grew up in NY.

My Asian friends parents sent them to Cram schools in summer. They actually request the books for next school year then spend 40 hours a week all summer studying.

They had pros helping with Essay, SAT tutors. Many their focus was just homework. And they worked as a group helping each other.

Compared to me. I worked 20 hours a week in HS, had chores. SAT was a book I took out of library. Paid SAT and college fees my self no help. Most of childhood slept in living room as did not even a bedroom so no place to study.

But how do you compare GPAs and SATs scores. Could my Asian class mate done any better than me.

I got lucky and a college had a program for disadvantaged students with potential and I got on. I recall a fellow student was appalled I needed under a certain HS GPA and SAT score to qualify. He said unfair I got in by having a GPA under a random number. Ironically how is it fair he got in with a GPA over a random number? That guy ended up moving near me in my 40s, we both graduated college, got similar household incomes and similar jobs,

Basing admittance on a random number is silly. Holistic approach is better.



Thank you for sharing this....it's important to understand! This is the problem in all the countries that rely solely on numbers for college admissions. They're all committing major discrimination against those who are not financially well off. And in some of those countries, you don't even get to go to college at all if you don't score highly enough, so there's a huge consequence.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nothing says the schools have to pick their students based on academic merit alone. It's not a simple GPA/standardized test score combo that is required to gain admission.

Athletes - If the schools choose to have athletic teams as an activity, why not fill them with decent players? Not shocking. Is a talented musician, academic team member, or speech/debate team member necessarily superior to or more valuable than a talented athlete under a holistic admissions approach?


Except that holistic admission shouldn’t be making you check Race Box and using that to discriminate based on race?


What if one of the goals of admissions was to foster a diverse community of kids with different viewpoints/experiences? Diverse in many ways, including race.

Should the government tell colleges who they should admit? Talk about big government.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nothing says the schools have to pick their students based on academic merit alone. It's not a simple GPA/standardized test score combo that is required to gain admission.

Athletes - If the schools choose to have athletic teams as an activity, why not fill them with decent players? Not shocking. Is a talented musician, academic team member, or speech/debate team member necessarily superior to or more valuable than a talented athlete under a holistic admissions approach?


Except that holistic admission shouldn’t be making you check Race Box and using that to discriminate based on race?

Right. Was stated in response to PPs stating that athletes shouldn't be given admissions "tips"/points/preferences.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:“The study, published earlier this month in the National Bureau of Economic Research, found that 43 percent of white students admitted to Harvard University were recruited athletes, legacy students, children of faculty and staff, or on the dean’s interest list — applicants whose parents or relatives have donated to Harvard.”

“The study also found that roughly 75 percent of the white students admitted from those four categories, labeled 'ALDCs' in the study, “would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs,” the study said.“

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-harvard-finds-43-percent-white-students-are-legacy-athletes-n1060361


Harvard and others should consider cutting back on their number of sports (especially the ones mostly wealthy kids play). Many hardly generate interest on campus attendance wise. Ask Stanford about trying to do that though...

Revenue sports actually add to most schools' diversity.


Those sports may not "generate revenue" but they generate more donations. So, they are not going away.

Generate interest, are you getting rid of clubs too?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
My Asian friends parents sent them to Cram schools in summer. They actually request the books for next school year then spend 40 hours a week all summer studying. They had pros helping with Essay, SAT tutors. Many their focus was just homework. And they worked as a group helping each other.
This still happens, including "Saturday school."


That’s called hard work. Not “legalized cheating.”


No that is not "hard work". Only "certain people" think of it that way. Colleges want to find unicorns with the SAT not somebody that studied and studied and studied for it.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nothing says the schools have to pick their students based on academic merit alone. It's not a simple GPA/standardized test score combo that is required to gain admission.

Athletes - If the schools choose to have athletic teams as an activity, why not fill them with decent players? Not shocking. Is a talented musician, academic team member, or speech/debate team member necessarily superior to or more valuable than a talented athlete under a holistic admissions approach?


Except that holistic admission shouldn’t be making you check Race Box and using that to discriminate based on race?

Right. Was stated in response to PPs stating that athletes shouldn't be given admissions "tips"/points/preferences.

To clarify, diversity on many different levels can be a goal. The schools shouldn't be using the box to eliminate people bc of their race. However, the schools also are not obligated to rank applicants solely by GPA and test scores.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:A lot of it is “legalized” cheating. I grew up in NY.

My Asian friends parents sent them to Cram schools in summer. They actually request the books for next school year then spend 40 hours a week all summer studying.

They had pros helping with Essay, SAT tutors. Many their focus was just homework. And they worked as a group helping each other.

Compared to me. I worked 20 hours a week in HS, had chores. SAT was a book I took out of library. Paid SAT and college fees my self no help. Most of childhood slept in living room as did not even a bedroom so no place to study.

But how do you compare GPAs and SATs scores. Could my Asian class mate done any better than me.

I got lucky and a college had a program for disadvantaged students with potential and I got on. I recall a fellow student was appalled I needed under a certain HS GPA and SAT score to qualify. He said unfair I got in by having a GPA under a random number. Ironically how is it fair he got in with a GPA over a random number? That guy ended up moving near me in my 40s, we both graduated college, got similar household incomes and similar jobs,

Basing admittance on a random number is silly. Holistic approach is better.



Holistic approach is good.
However what makes you think that you would be better in other extra areas such as ECs, Awards, Essay, Reasearch, etc than those
Asian kids.

Based on what you said, they are probably overall better on those areas as well.


Neither is "better" that is the point of having both in the same college.
post reply Forum Index » College and University Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: