Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see adding an economic aspect to it but we aren’t even close when it comes to racial equality. The lingering effects of systematic racism will take a long time to diminish.

So you're saying that we should continue to favor blacks over poor, disadvantaged whites until blacks mas a whole achieve "racial equality?"

And how is that measured? When blacks have the same net worth as whites? That will be impossible as long as blacks continue to have a 75% out-of-wedlock birth rate. You can't ignore personal behavior that leads to poverty, and say "let's keep giving mediocre blacks from middle class families preferential treatment over high-achieving poor whites until the average net worth of blacks is the same as whites."

Ahhh, it was going to come out eventually. Was just wondering how long. If those aren’t stereotypes I don’t know what is. I work for a membership organization of the most senior black executives in corporate America. We now have the studies that show in order for black people to succeed, they must significantly exceed metrics used to rate black and white candidates. They outpace their white counterparts consistently. Lots of data out there. You wouldn’t know because you are clearly perpetuating historical racist tropes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, enough.

Leave it to the education experts to wade through. Education should never be a political issue and maybe the states need to deal with their own special issues complying with the federal regulations already on them.

We already have politics over income levels as an barrier to higher education and it breaks my heart.

Enough.

Affirmative action inextricably links education with politics. I agree with you that we should not play political games with education. I'd be in favor of abolishing affirmative action from education altogether. Education should be a merit-based process. The color of your skin should not matter. The fact that someone is Asian should not cause them to lose a spot to a black person.

Asian applicants are losing their spots to white people.

+ 1,000,000. How soon we forget policies designed to keep elite schools from becoming "too Jewish"...



Nope.

They are losing their spots to everyone else because of a system designed, in practice, to help wealthy blacks.

I don't really care who benefits, the undeniable truth is that affirmative action discriminates against Asians on the basis of their race. It is therefore racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You clearly didn’t read the 1619 Project. Learn some history. Get over yourself. Black people aren’t taking anything away from you.

Huh? BLack kids with mediocre grades who get into college over better-scoring poor whites are indeed taking something away from those poor whotes: a chance to go to college and move out of a lower-class existence doe the rest of his life.

You need to at least admit that when black kids with a C average get into college over a white kid with a B average, they are indeed taking something away. You are not ENTITLED to affirmative action for generating after generation. The least you could do is say "thank you" to the white kids being displaced.

It isn't a zero sum game. Every time a college was forced to stop discriminating against women, blacks, and other minority students, they increased the total enrollment so that they did not have to cut back on white male slots, and especially legacy slots. White kids are getting into the same schools they would have gotten into in the past.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. "

Martin Luther King, Jr.

I missed the part about "except for college admissions where the color of your skin matters a lot."

Affirmative action is a partial remedy for outrageous racial discrimination, which still exists in housing, education, and employment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. "

Martin Luther King, Jr.

I missed the part about "except for college admissions where the color of your skin matters a lot."

Affirmative action is a partial remedy for outrageous racial discrimination, which still exists in housing, education, and employment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I need to move my kid out of the DMV before high school. You people are nuts. Besides my kid will have a better shot at Stanford coming from Tennessee with or without physics. Btw, when I lived in Plant City, Florida, the local bush school did not offer all these AP classes you entitled DMV elites. So some posters are saying those kids should not receive admission to Stanford because of their lack of high school physics and/calculus.

A lot of these posters couldn't find Tennessee or Plant City, FL on a map. They have no clue.

Anonymous wrote:I need to move my kid out of the DMV before high school. You people are nuts. Besides my kid will have a better shot at Stanford coming from Tennessee with or without physics. Btw, when I lived in Plant City, Florida, the local bush school did not offer all these AP classes you entitled DMV elites. So some posters are saying those kids should not receive admission to Stanford because of their lack of high school physics and/calculus.

Anonymous wrote:I need to move my kid out of the DMV before high school. You people are nuts. Besides my kid will have a better shot at Stanford coming from Tennessee with or without physics. Btw, when I lived in Plant City, Florida, the local bush school did not offer all these AP classes you entitled DMV elites. So some posters are saying those kids should not receive admission to Stanford because of their lack of high school physics and/calculus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you posters who are insisting that minorities admitted to competitive schools with lower grades and scores than white and Asian students do just as well, be realistic. In what universe would you put a crop of B- stidents in with straight A students, and not expect the former group to struggle to keep up with the latter group?

I've worked in the industry. I can tell you that that a high percentage of the minorities admitted under the lesser AA standards require a lot of tutoring to stay in the program. (Competitive universities invest a lot in keeping the AA students in their programs since they want to keep the drop-out rate low.) By comparison, the minorities who would have gained admission under the standard guidelines, which constitute about a third of minorities. do not need extra tutoring to keep from failing. As one would expect. After all, they were "equal" in terms of grades and test scores as the non-minority students.

Stanford had to create a couple of “physics for dummies” type courses to boost retention of URM students. Is that really the way AA is supposed to work? Pretty pathetic.

Or was the class created for the athletes?

DP but I posted in another thread about the lower level physics classes at Stanford. The classes are for the underrepresented who could not do the rigorous work of Stanford classes. It is part of a push by Stanford to be more inclusive.

Citation?

I cannot get it to link but the source material is the August 14, 2019 Stanford Newsletter. Please Google it or I will yet to download later. Thank you.

Here's the link:

https://news.stanford.edu/2019/08/14/making-physics-inclusive/

And a key quote:
"Physics 41E: The same as Physics 41: Mechanics, which is a required course for physics majors, but with added support. Students from underrepresented groups often don’t have the same level of preparation from high school as their majority peers. The difference in preparation is large enough that it may lead students to drop out of the major but small enough that the kind of support offered by this course can be enough to keep them in."

Why were these students admitted in the first place if they don't have the same level of preparation to the point that they cannot succeed at the standard level of curriculum rigor.

Your bigotry is clouding your logic. That is one class with extra help so students who did not go to an elite high school can catch up. I went to Princeton in 1976 and there was one freshman Physics course for those who had already learned Calculus in high school and another Physics course for those who hadn't and were taking Calculus concurrently. The students in the second course were not too stupid to be at Princeton and should not have been admitted, it just means they didn't go to top math and science prep schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already Affirmative Action that is income based -- if your income is high enough, you're all but guaranteed a spot in a top school.

LOL ITA

But to OP's point, I also agree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you posters who are insisting that minorities admitted to competitive schools with lower grades and scores than white and Asian students do just as well, be realistic. In what universe would you put a crop of B- stidents in with straight A students, and not expect the former group to struggle to keep up with the latter group?

I've worked in the industry. I can tell you that that a high percentage of the minorities admitted under the lesser AA standards require a lot of tutoring to stay in the program. (Competitive universities invest a lot in keeping the AA students in their programs since they want to keep the drop-out rate low.) By comparison, the minorities who would have gained admission under the standard guidelines, which constitute about a third of minorities. do not need extra tutoring to keep from failing. As one would expect. After all, they were "equal" in terms of grades and test scores as the non-minority students.

Stanford had to create a couple of “physics for dummies” type courses to boost retention of URM students. Is that really the way AA is supposed to work? Pretty pathetic.

Or was the class created for the athletes?

DP but I posted in another thread about the lower level physics classes at Stanford. The classes are for the underrepresented who could not do the rigorous work of Stanford classes. It is part of a push by Stanford to be more inclusive.

Citation?

I cannot get it to link but the source material is the August 14, 2019 Stanford Newsletter. Please Google it or I will yet to download later. Thank you.

Here's the link:

https://news.stanford.edu/2019/08/14/making-physics-inclusive/

And a key quote:
"Physics 41E: The same as Physics 41: Mechanics, which is a required course for physics majors, but with added support. Students from underrepresented groups often don’t have the same level of preparation from high school as their majority peers. The difference in preparation is large enough that it may lead students to drop out of the major but small enough that the kind of support offered by this course can be enough to keep them in."

Why were these students admitted in the first place if they don't have the same level of preparation to the point that they cannot succeed at the standard level of curriculum rigor.

Maybe there wasn’t easy access to calculus or AP physics in HS for them.

Anonymous wrote:" I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. "

Martin Luther King, Jr.

I missed the part about "except for college admissions where the color of your skin matters a lot."