Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:California school systems never went that rout. Even CalTech refused. They simply followed the law.

indeed and did it hurt the UC school's or CalTech's reputation that they let in so many Asians with high test scores? Nope.

So if they get rid of test scores, what academic merit do they look at ... grades? They'd have to also look at what HS you went to because not all A's are are created equal, and I'm guessing that a lot of the students at rigorous HS who get straight As are.... Asian American.

Next, they'll make GPAs optional.

maybe just sex, race, and a high school diploma?

Anonymous wrote:Kennedy was a Reagan appointee. There are conservative justices who have voted to uphold race conscious admissions even in public schools. And it remains to be seen how they will vote in cases involving private schools (especially their own alma maters).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Awww. Such faith. Touching. Liberals are effed buddy. The court is going to be conservative for an entire generation now. It will be the firewall against the unstoppable demographic and hence balance of power changes that will take place over the next 10 years. We need this. We need both sides to be balanced power wise, because we have idiots on both sides who over reach.

The Dems get: 1 person 1 vote and massive increases in Hispanic and minority votes that will swamp the white population in this country. This is going to happen, no way to stop this now. And they have some crazy idiots who will push for wealth redistribution policies like Universal healthcare, free college,

The republicans get : Citizens United and the supreme court. So they will use the power of money and courts to fight the democratic changes, because they will not have the votes in the next ten years.

Affirmative action is dead now. Unless Clarence Thomas dies and we get a democratic president and senate.

So how will colleges handle this.

They will go to zipcode recruiting. They will target Black and Hispanic zipcodes, Give these students massive holistic preference. Since it is not race based, the only way to combat this will be to claim "Disparate impact" , but the colleges will claim "Diversity" and so it will be a wash. The big losers here will be URM's who are upper middle class. Their days of riding the AA gravy train is going to come to an end. May also end some of the agitation on college campuses, most of this is being spearheaded by privileged URM kids who arrive and campus and start causing trouble.

Agree that the first post is naive wrt the type of Justice Trump would appoint. That said, conservative Justices may take a different attitude toward private universities (e.g. their own or because of a commitment to property rights/freedom of association). Some individuals will also defy expectations. Earl Warren, as AG and later Governor of CA was all for rounding up, relocating, and interning Japanese-Americans. Not the guy you’d have pegged for a leadership role wrt dismantling racial segregation. And it takes a few years for cases to get to the Supreme Court. So it strikes me as premature to declare affirmative action dead. (But not premature to be concerned about its fate and to push for its retention and plan for other ways to achieve racial diversity in elite colleges.)

I don’t think UMC kids from URMs will be screwed. They will include legacies, kids from elite feeder schools, and kids who have a variety of ways (other than SATs) of demonstrating why they’d be great additions to the student bodies of highly selective colleges. This whole gravy train narrative is really obnoxious and completely divorced from reality. I think you’ll also find that there are first gen kids (of all races) who are willing to “cause trouble” in the interests of making elite universities better places by pointing out institutional blindspots and pushing University leaders to live up to their own professed ideals.

Oh Please, spare me the liberal claptrap. All these kids want is identity based totalitarian control of what people can say on campus. They are tyrants who want to slience speech on campus. I have no sympathy for them. Look at "Shrieking girl" at Yale, or the incident at Middlebury or Evergreen state or DePaul or Berkeley. They are thugs and most of them are from privileged families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Awww. Such faith. Touching. Liberals are effed buddy. The court is going to be conservative for an entire generation now. It will be the firewall against the unstoppable demographic and hence balance of power changes that will take place over the next 10 years. We need this. We need both sides to be balanced power wise, because we have idiots on both sides who over reach.

The Dems get: 1 person 1 vote and massive increases in Hispanic and minority votes that will swamp the white population in this country. This is going to happen, no way to stop this now. And they have some crazy idiots who will push for wealth redistribution policies like Universal healthcare, free college,

The republicans get : Citizens United and the supreme court. So they will use the power of money and courts to fight the democratic changes, because they will not have the votes in the next ten years.

Affirmative action is dead now. Unless Clarence Thomas dies and we get a democratic president and senate.

So how will colleges handle this.

They will go to zipcode recruiting. They will target Black and Hispanic zipcodes, Give these students massive holistic preference. Since it is not race based, the only way to combat this will be to claim "Disparate impact" , but the colleges will claim "Diversity" and so it will be a wash. The big losers here will be URM's who are upper middle class. Their days of riding the AA gravy train is going to come to an end. May also end some of the agitation on college campuses, most of this is being spearheaded by privileged URM kids who arrive and campus and start causing trouble.

Agree that the first post is naive wrt the type of Justice Trump would appoint. That said, conservative Justices may take a different attitude toward private universities (e.g. their own or because of a commitment to property rights/freedom of association). Some individuals will also defy expectations. Earl Warren, as AG and later Governor of CA was all for rounding up, relocating, and interning Japanese-Americans. Not the guy you’d have pegged for a leadership role wrt dismantling racial segregation. And it takes a few years for cases to get to the Supreme Court. So it strikes me as premature to declare affirmative action dead. (But not premature to be concerned about its fate and to push for its retention and plan for other ways to achieve racial diversity in elite colleges.)

I don’t think UMC kids from URMs will be screwed. They will include legacies, kids from elite feeder schools, and kids who have a variety of ways (other than SATs) of demonstrating why they’d be great additions to the student bodies of highly selective colleges. This whole gravy train narrative is really obnoxious and completely divorced from reality. I think you’ll also find that there are first gen kids (of all races) who are willing to “cause trouble” in the interests of making elite universities better places by pointing out institutional blindspots and pushing University leaders to live up to their own professed ideals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Awww. Such faith. Touching. Liberals are effed buddy. The court is going to be conservative for an entire generation now. It will be the firewall against the unstoppable demographic and hence balance of power changes that will take place over the next 10 years. We need this. We need both sides to be balanced power wise, because we have idiots on both sides who over reach.

The Dems get: 1 person 1 vote and massive increases in Hispanic and minority votes that will swamp the white population in this country. This is going to happen, no way to stop this now. And they have some crazy idiots who will push for wealth redistribution policies like Universal healthcare, free college,

The republicans get : Citizens United and the supreme court. So they will use the power of money and courts to fight the democratic changes, because they will not have the votes in the next ten years.

Affirmative action is dead now. Unless Clarence Thomas dies and we get a democratic president and senate.

So how will colleges handle this.

They will go to zipcode recruiting. They will target Black and Hispanic zipcodes, Give these students massive holistic preference. Since it is not race based, the only way to combat this will be to claim "Disparate impact" , but the colleges will claim "Diversity" and so it will be a wash. The big losers here will be URM's who are upper middle class. Their days of riding the AA gravy train is going to come to an end. May also end some of the agitation on college campuses, most of this is being spearheaded by privileged URM kids who arrive and campus and start causing trouble.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many schools outside top-10 value Asian students. They are less likely to exclude or drive them away.

Schools outside of the top 10 definitely still cap Asian enrollment.

UC Berkeley and UCLA are #21s in the USNews. No AA at these schools. These schools may reject Ivy admit students. Jeremy Lin went to Harvard after he was denied by UCLA.

Jeremy Lin wasn't rejected by UCLA. He went to Harvard because he was their top basketball recruit. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/sports/basketball/for-knicks-lin-erasing-a-history-of-being-overlooked.html

Shows UCLA, by focusing on academics and less on sports, it's really caught up with the likes of Harvard. UCLA to Harvard is like Hyundai to BMW. While people maybe dissing Hyundai, JD Powers shows Hyundai and BMW are neck and neck, actually Hyundai topping BMW by a slight margin. By focusing on academics and less on irrelevant factors, state unis like UCLA can compete with private schools such as Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many schools outside top-10 value Asian students. They are less likely to exclude or drive them away.

Schools outside of the top 10 definitely still cap Asian enrollment.

UC Berkeley and UCLA are #21s in the USNews. No AA at these schools. These schools may reject Ivy admit students. Jeremy Lin went to Harvard after he was denied by UCLA.

Jeremy Lin wasn't rejected by UCLA. He went to Harvard because he was their top basketball recruit. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/sports/basketball/for-knicks-lin-erasing-a-history-of-being-overlooked.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many schools outside top-10 value Asian students. They are less likely to exclude or drive them away.

Schools outside of the top 10 definitely still cap Asian enrollment.

UC Berkeley and UCLA are #21s in the USNews. No AA at these schools. These schools may reject Ivy admit students. Jeremy Lin went to Harvard after he was denied by UCLA.

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Anonymous wrote:California school systems never went that rout. Even CalTech refused. They simply followed the law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be careful what you wish for.

If the court rules that colleges can't consider race to achieve a balanced student body, they are going to use different criteria to achieve that goal, and you will probably see Asian representation go down rather than up.

They'll use geography, income levels, or some other thing to achieve the goal, and that will likely result in a balance that is more similar to population percentages.

Colleges like Harvard are not going to default to grades and test scores to build their class. It will not happen, regardless of any court decision.

I mean ONLY grades and test scores, clicked submit too soon. They are not going to say "we can't consider race anymore, so we'll take all the 36 ACTs and no 34s."

repeat: Be careful what you wish for.

Anonymous wrote:Test scores have lead the top school down that path of less innovative and less impressive alum. So yes they need to find another way to find the best and the brightest.

They need people that cure cancer, win noble prizes, change the world, become world leaders.

They don't need more doctors and bankers.