Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, oozing from your post is your apparent bigotry in the assumption that pocs at your desired universities are admitted due to race.

Affirmative action benefits non-POC women more than ANY protected class.

POCs are fleeing PWIs because they are sick of the bigotry and racism of underperforming privileged kids.

Let that sink in.

Thank you. I feel like absent from a lot discussions about affirmative action is how many rich white people get away with being mediocre just bc of their connections and privilege.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

There’s massively more variance in scores within an income decile than there is between them. HHI doesn’t predict scores once you add in parental (especially maternal) education. The UC system did an in depth analysis using all of the data in their system over decades and found that standardized testing was the single best predictor of college success, even better than HS grades. Grades and standardized testing together were better as expected.

I do agree on super scoring, and IMO it shouldn’t be a thing. I think all scores should be sent to colleges; a 1450 with one sitting is much more impressive than a super-scored 1500 after 6 attempts.

I think they should limit the testing to 3 times, send the best, no super scoring.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

There’s massively more variance in scores within an income decile than there is between them. HHI doesn’t predict scores once you add in parental (especially maternal) education. The UC system did an in depth analysis using all of the data in their system over decades and found that standardized testing was the single best predictor of college success, even better than HS grades. Grades and standardized testing together were better as expected.

I do agree on super scoring, and IMO it shouldn’t be a thing. I think all scores should be sent to colleges; a 1450 with one sitting is much more impressive than a super-scored 1500 after 6 attempts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

There’s massively more variance in scores within an income decile than there is between them. HHI doesn’t predict scores once you add in parental (especially maternal) education. The UC system did an in depth analysis using all of the data in their system over decades and found that standardized testing was the single best predictor of college success, even better than HS grades. Grades and standardized testing together were better as expected.

I do agree on super scoring, and IMO it shouldn’t be a thing. I think all scores should be sent to colleges; a 1450 with one sitting is much more impressive than a super-scored 1500 after 6 attempts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it will vary. Some schools will be happy to just enroll the best students and other will drop aa in favor of economic diversity

You make it sound like wanting diversity is at odds with enrolling the best students. I find these assumptions to be suspect. Like the posters who define merit as whatever benefits them the most.

The way diversity is defined and implemented today, yes, it is absolutely at odds at enrolling the best students. There is such a huge skills gap between the average URM and non URM applicant, that there is a serious shortage of equivalently qualified URM applicants in the application pipeline. If a college insists on getting anything close to proportional representation despite this, then by definition they have to pick lower qualified URM students to fill their class. The only way to claim that diversity does not affect quality today, is to redefine the very meaning of the word merit to something nonsensical, like Harvard did by introducing spurious variables like the personality ratings into the mix.

Also in every country where diversity is actually present, it has led to destruction of social cohesion, social trust and increase in friction. The former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Myanmar being some examples) Diversity advocate have only recently recognized this because now they are insisting on "inclusion" as being another responsibility of the non URM pool. This is just code for non URM's having to walk on eggshells, so as not to trigger or piss off URM's on campus. It's a fool's errand. Human kind is tribal by nature and just like diversity brought strife all over the world, it is destroying America's campus environment today.

So what is your solution? Whine endlessly about it? Or have no diversity and every racial group sticks to themselves? It’s too late for that. This country is diverse and we’d better continue to figure out ways to get along and include everyone because diversity isn’t going anywhere.

Seems like AAs are the only group needing assistance. Look at the makeup of colleges in Texas. Unfortunately, AAs are still very much struggling in this country.

Maybe they should pick up a few tips from here about how and why certain immigrant communities succeed, instead of constantly whining about how pervasive systemic racism in America is? If America is that bad, how come all these newcomers are leaving native born blacks and whites in the dust? Simple. It's all about cultural capital, a term that's taboo in leftist circles

httphttps://youtu.be/-eMLAFV4cx8be/-eMLAFV4cx8

Yeah but none of them ever dealing with systematic oppression by the whites.

Because wait for it...... THERE IS NONE. Only lazy race huksters point to systemic racism as THE REASON, THEY ARE NOT MAKING PROGRESS. Because if America was systemically racist, you think Nigerian and Ghanaian immigrants would succeed here? Vietnamese refugees would succeed here? A person like Ilhan Omar would be in Congress?

You’re proving my point. Ilhan Omar’s father was a prominent senior officer in the Somali National Army before they immigrated. They were not at all “dirt poor.”

No you are embarrassing yourself. Ilhan Omar as a Muslim Black immigrants woman who got herself elected to Congress is indisputable proof that AMERICA IS NOT SYSTEMICALLY RACIST AND IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT CULTURAL CAPITAL ANYBODY CAN SUCCEED IN AMERICA. That's the point

Maybe stop yelling at everyone, sit down, and learn about what systemic racism actually is. If you don’t want to come across as an arrogant, ignorant a-hole.

Some idiots deserve to be yelled at. I actually took the time to read "White Fragility", and "SO you want to talk about race" just to make sure I wasn't missing something obvious. So don't lecture me. BTW have you read any books by Thomas Sowell or any of the other black intellectuals or even seen the podcast of people like "Coleman Hughes" or do you so convinced that you are right that you don't even want to listen to the other side?

Hubris is a quality that is typical of leftists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it will vary. Some schools will be happy to just enroll the best students and other will drop aa in favor of economic diversity

You make it sound like wanting diversity is at odds with enrolling the best students. I find these assumptions to be suspect. Like the posters who define merit as whatever benefits them the most.

The way diversity is defined and implemented today, yes, it is absolutely at odds at enrolling the best students. There is such a huge skills gap between the average URM and non URM applicant, that there is a serious shortage of equivalently qualified URM applicants in the application pipeline. If a college insists on getting anything close to proportional representation despite this, then by definition they have to pick lower qualified URM students to fill their class. The only way to claim that diversity does not affect quality today, is to redefine the very meaning of the word merit to something nonsensical, like Harvard did by introducing spurious variables like the personality ratings into the mix.

Also in every country where diversity is actually present, it has led to destruction of social cohesion, social trust and increase in friction. The former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Myanmar being some examples) Diversity advocate have only recently recognized this because now they are insisting on "inclusion" as being another responsibility of the non URM pool. This is just code for non URM's having to walk on eggshells, so as not to trigger or piss off URM's on campus. It's a fool's errand. Human kind is tribal by nature and just like diversity brought strife all over the world, it is destroying America's campus environment today.

So what is your solution? Whine endlessly about it? Or have no diversity and every racial group sticks to themselves? It’s too late for that. This country is diverse and we’d better continue to figure out ways to get along and include everyone because diversity isn’t going anywhere.

Seems like AAs are the only group needing assistance. Look at the makeup of colleges in Texas. Unfortunately, AAs are still very much struggling in this country.

Maybe they should pick up a few tips from here about how and why certain immigrant communities succeed, instead of constantly whining about how pervasive systemic racism in America is? If America is that bad, how come all these newcomers are leaving native born blacks and whites in the dust? Simple. It's all about cultural capital, a term that's taboo in leftist circles

httphttps://youtu.be/-eMLAFV4cx8be/-eMLAFV4cx8

Yeah but none of them ever dealing with systematic oppression by the whites.

Because wait for it...... THERE IS NONE. Only lazy race huksters point to systemic racism as THE REASON, THEY ARE NOT MAKING PROGRESS. Because if America was systemically racist, you think Nigerian and Ghanaian immigrants would succeed here? Vietnamese refugees would succeed here? A person like Ilhan Omar would be in Congress?

You’re proving my point. Ilhan Omar’s father was a prominent senior officer in the Somali National Army before they immigrated. They were not at all “dirt poor.”

No you are embarrassing yourself. Ilhan Omar as a Muslim Black immigrants woman who got herself elected to Congress is indisputable proof that AMERICA IS NOT SYSTEMICALLY RACIST AND IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT CULTURAL CAPITAL ANYBODY CAN SUCCEED IN AMERICA. That's the point

Maybe stop yelling at everyone, sit down, and learn about what systemic racism actually is. If you don’t want to come across as an arrogant, ignorant a-hole.

Some idiots deserve to be yelled at. I actually took the time to read "White Fragility", and "SO you want to talk about race" just to make sure I wasn't missing something obvious. So don't lecture me. BTW have you read any books by Thomas Sowell or any of the other black intellectuals or even seen the podcast of people like "Coleman Hughes" or do you so convinced that you are right that you don't even want to listen to the other side?

Hubris is a quality that is typical of leftists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it will vary. Some schools will be happy to just enroll the best students and other will drop aa in favor of economic diversity

You make it sound like wanting diversity is at odds with enrolling the best students. I find these assumptions to be suspect. Like the posters who define merit as whatever benefits them the most.

The way diversity is defined and implemented today, yes, it is absolutely at odds at enrolling the best students. There is such a huge skills gap between the average URM and non URM applicant, that there is a serious shortage of equivalently qualified URM applicants in the application pipeline. If a college insists on getting anything close to proportional representation despite this, then by definition they have to pick lower qualified URM students to fill their class. The only way to claim that diversity does not affect quality today, is to redefine the very meaning of the word merit to something nonsensical, like Harvard did by introducing spurious variables like the personality ratings into the mix.

Also in every country where diversity is actually present, it has led to destruction of social cohesion, social trust and increase in friction. The former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Myanmar being some examples) Diversity advocate have only recently recognized this because now they are insisting on "inclusion" as being another responsibility of the non URM pool. This is just code for non URM's having to walk on eggshells, so as not to trigger or piss off URM's on campus. It's a fool's errand. Human kind is tribal by nature and just like diversity brought strife all over the world, it is destroying America's campus environment today.

So what is your solution? Whine endlessly about it? Or have no diversity and every racial group sticks to themselves? It’s too late for that. This country is diverse and we’d better continue to figure out ways to get along and include everyone because diversity isn’t going anywhere.

Seems like AAs are the only group needing assistance. Look at the makeup of colleges in Texas. Unfortunately, AAs are still very much struggling in this country.

Maybe they should pick up a few tips from here about how and why certain immigrant communities succeed, instead of constantly whining about how pervasive systemic racism in America is? If America is that bad, how come all these newcomers are leaving native born blacks and whites in the dust? Simple. It's all about cultural capital, a term that's taboo in leftist circles

httphttps://youtu.be/-eMLAFV4cx8be/-eMLAFV4cx8

Yeah but none of them ever dealing with systematic oppression by the whites.

Because wait for it...... THERE IS NONE. Only lazy race huksters point to systemic racism as THE REASON, THEY ARE NOT MAKING PROGRESS. Because if America was systemically racist, you think Nigerian and Ghanaian immigrants would succeed here? Vietnamese refugees would succeed here? A person like Ilhan Omar would be in Congress?

You’re proving my point. Ilhan Omar’s father was a prominent senior officer in the Somali National Army before they immigrated. They were not at all “dirt poor.”

No you are embarrassing yourself. Ilhan Omar as a Muslim Black immigrants woman who got herself elected to Congress is indisputable proof that AMERICA IS NOT SYSTEMICALLY RACIST AND IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT CULTURAL CAPITAL ANYBODY CAN SUCCEED IN AMERICA. That's the point

Maybe stop yelling at everyone, sit down, and learn about what systemic racism actually is. If you don’t want to come across as an arrogant, ignorant a-hole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

Scores are at the same time, the best tool that low income kids can achieve on their onw.

Fancy ECs, Research, Sports, etc. are the ones really driven by HHI

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Standardized testing in America has racist origins. Reality not an appropriate measuring stick. Plus scores are pretty much driven by HHI.

Super scoring makes standardized testing watered down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it will vary. Some schools will be happy to just enroll the best students and other will drop aa in favor of economic diversity

You make it sound like wanting diversity is at odds with enrolling the best students. I find these assumptions to be suspect. Like the posters who define merit as whatever benefits them the most.

The way diversity is defined and implemented today, yes, it is absolutely at odds at enrolling the best students. There is such a huge skills gap between the average URM and non URM applicant, that there is a serious shortage of equivalently qualified URM applicants in the application pipeline. If a college insists on getting anything close to proportional representation despite this, then by definition they have to pick lower qualified URM students to fill their class. The only way to claim that diversity does not affect quality today, is to redefine the very meaning of the word merit to something nonsensical, like Harvard did by introducing spurious variables like the personality ratings into the mix.

Also in every country where diversity is actually present, it has led to destruction of social cohesion, social trust and increase in friction. The former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Myanmar being some examples) Diversity advocate have only recently recognized this because now they are insisting on "inclusion" as being another responsibility of the non URM pool. This is just code for non URM's having to walk on eggshells, so as not to trigger or piss off URM's on campus. It's a fool's errand. Human kind is tribal by nature and just like diversity brought strife all over the world, it is destroying America's campus environment today.

So what is your solution? Whine endlessly about it? Or have no diversity and every racial group sticks to themselves? It’s too late for that. This country is diverse and we’d better continue to figure out ways to get along and include everyone because diversity isn’t going anywhere.

The solution is pretty simple.

1) Stop lying to the American people and acknowledge that the big skill gap is not due to systemic racism, but lack of cultural capital in the URM community, most of which is directly under their control.
2) Expect better from URM communities instead of molly coddling them. Delayed gratification, better work ethic, stronger focus on academics, stronger families, less out of wedlock child births for a start. None of this needs any change in attitude from non URM's
3) Intervene in elementary school to create a bigger pool of eligible candidates
3) Forget recruiting for Diversity. Recruit for the same standards
That's hard work, instead of yelling "systemic racism" whereever you see racial disparity, which is the lazy way out

+1

DEI is making matters worse, not better. I have black friends who won't go to a black doctor.

And because of racism, I am black and exclusively use black doctors - outcomes are better because care is taken seriously and pain/symptoms are not brushed off:

https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/how-we-fail-black-patients-pain
https://hbr.org/2018/08/research-having-a-black-doctor-led-black-men-to-receive-more-effective-care
https://www.michiganmedicine.org/health-lab/minority-patients-benefit-having-minority-doctors-thats-hard-match-make
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4843483/

That's fine then. Have blacks and anybody else who don't meet the same academic and scholastic criteria for Medical schools as the general pool candidates admitted to a nurse practitioner or a similar program and label it so. Whoever wants to can visit them can and enjoy the "empathy" factor and cheaper prices for some services.. Don't call it MD unless they are of the same academic caliber.. They clearly are not, even after enjoying four years of undergrad AA preferences, now they need graduate AA preferences to get ahead? That's insulting

Anonymous wrote:Colleges have been preparing for this eventuality by getting rid of standardized test scores, which has been a hurdle for certain minority groups. In 5-10 years, when they still can’t achieve “equity” in admissions, colleges will stop using GPA’s as a measure of qualification and look only at life experience. And then eventually I think all college admission will be by lottery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it will vary. Some schools will be happy to just enroll the best students and other will drop aa in favor of economic diversity

You make it sound like wanting diversity is at odds with enrolling the best students. I find these assumptions to be suspect. Like the posters who define merit as whatever benefits them the most.

The way diversity is defined and implemented today, yes, it is absolutely at odds at enrolling the best students. There is such a huge skills gap between the average URM and non URM applicant, that there is a serious shortage of equivalently qualified URM applicants in the application pipeline. If a college insists on getting anything close to proportional representation despite this, then by definition they have to pick lower qualified URM students to fill their class. The only way to claim that diversity does not affect quality today, is to redefine the very meaning of the word merit to something nonsensical, like Harvard did by introducing spurious variables like the personality ratings into the mix.

Also in every country where diversity is actually present, it has led to destruction of social cohesion, social trust and increase in friction. The former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Myanmar being some examples) Diversity advocate have only recently recognized this because now they are insisting on "inclusion" as being another responsibility of the non URM pool. This is just code for non URM's having to walk on eggshells, so as not to trigger or piss off URM's on campus. It's a fool's errand. Human kind is tribal by nature and just like diversity brought strife all over the world, it is destroying America's campus environment today.

So what is your solution? Whine endlessly about it? Or have no diversity and every racial group sticks to themselves? It’s too late for that. This country is diverse and we’d better continue to figure out ways to get along and include everyone because diversity isn’t going anywhere.

The solution is pretty simple.

1) Stop lying to the American people and acknowledge that the big skill gap is not due to systemic racism, but lack of cultural capital in the URM community, most of which is directly under their control.
2) Expect better from URM communities instead of molly coddling them. Delayed gratification, better work ethic, stronger focus on academics, stronger families, less out of wedlock child births for a start. None of this needs any change in attitude from non URM's
3) Intervene in elementary school to create a bigger pool of eligible candidates
3) Forget recruiting for Diversity. Recruit for the same standards
That's hard work, instead of yelling "systemic racism" whereever you see racial disparity, which is the lazy way out