Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
There was a poster several pages back who said young white males were "harmed" by AA. Maybe that PP can explain what he meant by harmed.
That was me.
By "harm," I mean pay a price for affirmative action policies. It's simple math. Let's say a med school, for example, has X number of slots and have determined that they want 15% of the entering class to be black (since 15% of the broader population is black.) In order to accomplish that, they need to drop their GPA cut-off to 3.3. No white male would get in with that stat and instead needs a 3.6.
Unfortunately (for the white guy), he earned a 3.5. He's rejected. If slots didn't need to open up for black kids with 3.3, in order to meet AA goals, the school could drop down to 3.5 for everyone, race not a factor, and the white kid would have passed the cut-off. This can play out at med schools throughout the country, and he has to give up his dream of being a doctor. I've seen this happen in two instances with bright, caring young white men.
Whether this sacrifice is worth it to have a diverse population among doctors is a separate area of discussion. But you can't deny that the white kid paid a price as a result of affirmative action policies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
There was a poster several pages back who said young white males were "harmed" by AA. Maybe that PP can explain what he meant by harmed.
That was me.
By "harm," I mean pay a price for affirmative action policies. It's simple math. Let's say a med school, for example, has X number of slots and have determined that they want 15% of the entering class to be black (since 15% of the broader population is black.) In order to accomplish that, they need to drop their GPA cut-off to 3.3. No white male would get in with that stat and instead needs a 3.6.
Unfortunately (for the white guy), he earned a 3.5. He's rejected. If slots didn't need to open up for black kids with 3.3, in order to meet AA goals, the school could drop down to 3.5 for everyone, race not a factor, and the white kid would have passed the cut-off. This can play out at med schools throughout the country, and he has to give up his dream of being a doctor. I've seen this happen in two instances with bright, caring young white men.
Whether this sacrifice is worth it to have a diverse population among doctors is a separate area of discussion. But you can't deny that the white kid paid a price as a result of affirmative action policies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
There was a poster several pages back who said young white males were "harmed" by AA. Maybe that PP can explain what he meant by harmed.
That was me.
By "harm," I mean pay a price for affirmative action policies. It's simple math. Let's say a med school, for example, has X number of slots and have determined that they want 15% of the entering class to be black (since 15% of the broader population is black.) In order to accomplish that, they need to drop their GPA cut-off to 3.3. No white male would get in with that stat and instead needs a 3.6.
Unfortunately (for the white guy), he earned a 3.5. He's rejected. If slots didn't need to open up for black kids with 3.3, in order to meet AA goals, the school could drop down to 3.5 for everyone, race not a factor, and the white kid would have passed the cut-off. This can play out at med schools throughout the country, and he has to give up his dream of being a doctor. I've seen this happen in two instances with bright, caring young white men.
Whether this sacrifice is worth it to have a diverse population among doctors is a separate area of discussion. But you can't deny that the white kid paid a price as a result of affirmative action policies.
That's an interesting hypothetical, but in fact last year only 7% of students starting med school were black. So even with affirmative action, we can't get even close to a representative number of black students in med school.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321498/data/factstablea18.pdf
The reason they couldn't get to the 15% is because there needs to be a hard cut-off at some point. You can't, for example, lower admissions standards to 2.8 (for blacks) in order to reach the goal. Otherwise, you are admitting students who are likely to fail the program. Still doesn't negate the point that when you have a finite number of slots with lower standards for Group A and higher standards for Group B, Group B pays a price.
I am also the PP who strongly supports AA policies, but based on income. This is more fair. And, as I've pointed out, if blacks are disproportionately poor compared to whites, they will still be benefiting from AA.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
There was a poster several pages back who said young white males were "harmed" by AA. Maybe that PP can explain what he meant by harmed.
That was me.
By "harm," I mean pay a price for affirmative action policies. It's simple math. Let's say a med school, for example, has X number of slots and have determined that they want 15% of the entering class to be black (since 15% of the broader population is black.) In order to accomplish that, they need to drop their GPA cut-off to 3.3. No white male would get in with that stat and instead needs a 3.6.
Unfortunately (for the white guy), he earned a 3.5. He's rejected. If slots didn't need to open up for black kids with 3.3, in order to meet AA goals, the school could drop down to 3.5 for everyone, race not a factor, and the white kid would have passed the cut-off. This can play out at med schools throughout the country, and he has to give up his dream of being a doctor. I've seen this happen in two instances with bright, caring young white men.
Whether this sacrifice is worth it to have a diverse population among doctors is a separate area of discussion. But you can't deny that the white kid paid a price as a result of affirmative action policies.
That's an interesting hypothetical, but in fact last year only 7% of students starting med school were black. So even with affirmative action, we can't get even close to a representative number of black students in med school.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321498/data/factstablea18.pdf
Anonymous wrote:
That was me.
By "harm," I mean pay a price for affirmative action policies. It's simple math. Let's say a med school, for example, has X number of slots and have determined that they want 15% of the entering class to be black (since 15% of the broader population is black.) In order to accomplish that, they need to drop their GPA cut-off to 3.3. No white male would get in with that stat and instead needs a 3.6.
Unfortunately (for the white guy), he earned a 3.5. He's rejected. If slots didn't need to open up for black kids with 3.3, in order to meet AA goals, the school could drop down to 3.5 for everyone, race not a factor, and the white kid would have passed the cut-off. This can play out at med schools throughout the country, and he has to give up his dream of being a doctor. I've seen this happen in two instances with bright, caring young white men.
Whether this sacrifice is worth it to have a diverse population among doctors is a separate area of discussion. But you can't deny that the white kid paid a price as a result of affirmative action policies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
There was a poster several pages back who said young white males were "harmed" by AA. Maybe that PP can explain what he meant by harmed.
That was me.
By "harm," I mean pay a price for affirmative action policies. It's simple math. Let's say a med school, for example, has X number of slots and have determined that they want 15% of the entering class to be black (since 15% of the broader population is black.) In order to accomplish that, they need to drop their GPA cut-off to 3.3. No white male would get in with that stat and instead needs a 3.6.
Unfortunately (for the white guy), he earned a 3.5. He's rejected. If slots didn't need to open up for black kids with 3.3, in order to meet AA goals, the school could drop down to 3.5 for everyone, race not a factor, and the white kid would have passed the cut-off. This can play out at med schools throughout the country, and he has to give up his dream of being a doctor. I've seen this happen in two instances with bright, caring young white men.
Whether this sacrifice is worth it to have a diverse population among doctors is a separate area of discussion. But you can't deny that the white kid paid a price as a result of affirmative action policies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
There was a poster several pages back who said young white males were "harmed" by AA. Maybe that PP can explain what he meant by harmed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Doesn't really matter who said it in this thread...the Department of Justice obviously suspects it so they took action.
No...many of us suspect that this is the administration trying to fire up the campaign rhetoric of "victimizing" Whites. Seems like whenever the administration has a bad week, they always reach back to the campaign trail. Another example is Trump bringing up HRC's emails in WV yesterday.
If that is indeed the case then I would have to agree with the argument that whites are indeed victims...
Victims of the propaganda machine.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:White people just can't make it America anymore. Thanks, Obama. White people need more opportunity or they will be shut out from power.
Except that photo is of older white males, who were not harmed by AA policies (or at least not to the extent it's going on today). We are talking about white teenagers currently, who are rejected from colleges or grad schools in favor of lower-scoring minorities.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Doesn't really matter who said it in this thread...the Department of Justice obviously suspects it so they took action.
No...many of us suspect that this is the administration trying to fire up the campaign rhetoric of "victimizing" Whites. Seems like whenever the administration has a bad week, they always reach back to the campaign trail. Another example is Trump bringing up HRC's emails in WV yesterday.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Doesn't really matter who said it in this thread...the Department of Justice obviously suspects it so they took action.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Doesn't really matter who said it in this thread...the Department of Justice obviously suspects it so they took action.
Oh, I see. You're just making things up.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone please post the data that show white students are not going to college because black students took all their spots?
Thanks.
Which poster said white kids aren't going to college because black kids took all their spots?
Doesn't really matter who said it in this thread...the Department of Justice obviously suspects it so they took action.