Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

I doubt more than 5% high school grads earn these stats.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

I think that the folks screaming about Affirmative Action know that their children and grandchildren are unlikely to be Black, but they think that if they can just get rid of Affirmative Action wihle keeping legacy admission, it might benefit them down the road.

This is about preserving the option of legacy admission just in case it benefits them and/or future generations, while getting rid of the factors unlikely to benefit them/future generations.

Everyone…this is it.

The Asians admitted to the top schools don’t give a rats a** about the ones who aren’t.

And once they are in the club, they are just as likely to want to preserve legacy as the white lax bro.

Please cite your source on this. Otherwise you are talking out of your a$$.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

There's no denying that. I think that legacy should end. It's not mutually exclusive to end legacy and insist that the bar to entry be the same regardless of race.

It might not be mutually exclusive, but the cries about the legacy kids are a whisper, compared to *all this* about the very small percentage of black and brown kids getting into these schools. Let's all keep that in mind when we claim we're fighting against systemic racism.....

Amen

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

I think that the folks screaming about Affirmative Action know that their children and grandchildren are unlikely to be Black, but they think that if they can just get rid of Affirmative Action wihle keeping legacy admission, it might benefit them down the road.

This is about preserving the option of legacy admission just in case it benefits them and/or future generations, while getting rid of the factors unlikely to benefit them/future generations.

Everyone…this is it.

The Asians admitted to the top schools don’t give a rats a** about the ones who aren’t.

And once they are in the club, they are just as likely to want to preserve legacy as the white lax bro.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

There's no denying that. I think that legacy should end. It's not mutually exclusive to end legacy and insist that the bar to entry be the same regardless of race.

It might not be mutually exclusive, but the cries about the legacy kids are a whisper, compared to *all this* about the very small percentage of black and brown kids getting into these schools. Let's all keep that in mind when we claim we're fighting against systemic racism.....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

There's no denying that. I think that legacy should end. It's not mutually exclusive to end legacy and insist that the bar to entry be the same regardless of race.

Yup---they are only against something that affects them

It might not be mutually exclusive, but the cries about the legacy kids are a whisper, compared to *all this* about the very small percentage of black and brown kids getting into these schools. Let's all keep that in mind when we claim we're fighting against systemic racism.....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It must be really exhausting being a person of Asian descent if you want to get into medicine. You clearly *must* be that much better than basically all races. The MCAT and gpas of med school matriculants speak for themselves:



On the flip side, this means I'll go out of my way from now on to go to Asian doctors only, because they clearly must be wayyyyy better than the average because of their race of they want a shot.

Maybe we should bring affirmative action lawsuits to multibillion dollar industries like professional sports that clearly don't have enough diversity because they draft players based on skill and not diversity. How many Asian and Hispanic players can you name in the NBA or NFL. Those leagues are allowed to ignore diversity in admissions because they draft based on skills alone. If they're allowed, so should universities.

I will engage you since it seems people love to use the NBA as an example of why it is ok not to pursue diversity when it comes to players?

1) The NBA provides entertainment for customers. In order to put forward the best experience, teams draft the "best" players. Unlike in other areas of American life where so-called "merit" is often subjective (i.e., based on who is evaluating and what "standards" they want to use), NBA players show their talents by scoring, defending, etc. which show up in stats

2) Elite colleges are choosing which students get to join their "teams". So long as the students pass a threshold of acceptability when it comes to SATS and grades, whatever that may be (it seems like Harvard uses the 98th percentile for SATS/ACTs), then they take into account a number of factors including the race, geography, ECs, etc. These schools aren't picking these students to satisfy the needs of the public or consumers. These colleges aren't admitting the kids with only the highest SATs and grades. If that were the case, there still wouldn't be enough room to accommodate all the kids with perfect scores, so then what?

Also, I have a problem with your notion that someone getting a higher score or grades would make them a better doctor. Any doctor passing their boards should be capable of being a good doctor. Same goes with lawyers. Just because someone aced the LSAT and got great grades doesn't make them a better lawyer...

It’s a dumb analogy because NBA teams aren’t subject to any rules on how they select players. They’re setting their own standards and behaving accordingly. Colleges are doing exactly the same and these people just don’t like their standards.

Majority of the T25 colleges are Private Colleges. They can pick and choose what they want in their freshman class. Nobody is guaranteed a right to an "elite college education" if they score 1580+ on the SATs. If anything, the people involved in these lawsuits are going a long way to demonstrate why they might not be "T25 material"---they could be doing so much better for society if they focused their efforts on a topic to better society, not just to better themselves for a minuscule improvement in education (That nobody is guaranteed access to).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It must be really exhausting being a person of Asian descent if you want to get into medicine. You clearly *must* be that much better than basically all races. The MCAT and gpas of med school matriculants speak for themselves:



On the flip side, this means I'll go out of my way from now on to go to Asian doctors only, because they clearly must be wayyyyy better than the average because of their race of they want a shot.

Maybe we should bring affirmative action lawsuits to multibillion dollar industries like professional sports that clearly don't have enough diversity because they draft players based on skill and not diversity. How many Asian and Hispanic players can you name in the NBA or NFL. Those leagues are allowed to ignore diversity in admissions because they draft based on skills alone. If they're allowed, so should universities.

I will engage you since it seems people love to use the NBA as an example of why it is ok not to pursue diversity when it comes to players?

1) The NBA provides entertainment for customers. In order to put forward the best experience, teams draft the "best" players. Unlike in other areas of American life where so-called "merit" is often subjective (i.e., based on who is evaluating and what "standards" they want to use), NBA players show their talents by scoring, defending, etc. which show up in stats

2) Elite colleges are choosing which students get to join their "teams". So long as the students pass a threshold of acceptability when it comes to SATS and grades, whatever that may be (it seems like Harvard uses the 98th percentile for SATS/ACTs), then they take into account a number of factors including the race, geography, ECs, etc. These schools aren't picking these students to satisfy the needs of the public or consumers. These colleges aren't admitting the kids with only the highest SATs and grades. If that were the case, there still wouldn't be enough room to accommodate all the kids with perfect scores, so then what?

Also, I have a problem with your notion that someone getting a higher score or grades would make them a better doctor. Any doctor passing their boards should be capable of being a good doctor. Same goes with lawyers. Just because someone aced the LSAT and got great grades doesn't make them a better lawyer...

It’s a dumb analogy because NBA teams aren’t subject to any rules on how they select players. They’re setting their own standards and behaving accordingly. Colleges are doing exactly the same and these people just don’t like their standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

I think that the folks screaming about Affirmative Action know that their children and grandchildren are unlikely to be Black, but they think that if they can just get rid of Affirmative Action wihle keeping legacy admission, it might benefit them down the road.

This is about preserving the option of legacy admission just in case it benefits them and/or future generations, while getting rid of the factors unlikely to benefit them/future generations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It must be really exhausting being a person of Asian descent if you want to get into medicine. You clearly *must* be that much better than basically all races. The MCAT and gpas of med school matriculants speak for themselves:



On the flip side, this means I'll go out of my way from now on to go to Asian doctors only, because they clearly must be wayyyyy better than the average because of their race of they want a shot.

Maybe we should bring affirmative action lawsuits to multibillion dollar industries like professional sports that clearly don't have enough diversity because they draft players based on skill and not diversity. How many Asian and Hispanic players can you name in the NBA or NFL. Those leagues are allowed to ignore diversity in admissions because they draft based on skills alone. If they're allowed, so should universities.

I will engage you since it seems people love to use the NBA as an example of why it is ok not to pursue diversity when it comes to players?

1) The NBA provides entertainment for customers. In order to put forward the best experience, teams draft the "best" players. Unlike in other areas of American life where so-called "merit" is often subjective (i.e., based on who is evaluating and what "standards" they want to use), NBA players show their talents by scoring, defending, etc. which show up in stats

2) Elite colleges are choosing which students get to join their "teams". So long as the students pass a threshold of acceptability when it comes to SATS and grades, whatever that may be (it seems like Harvard uses the 98th percentile for SATS/ACTs), then they take into account a number of factors including the race, geography, ECs, etc. These schools aren't picking these students to satisfy the needs of the public or consumers. These colleges aren't admitting the kids with only the highest SATs and grades. If that were the case, there still wouldn't be enough room to accommodate all the kids with perfect scores, so then what?

Also, I have a problem with your notion that someone getting a higher score or grades would make them a better doctor. Any doctor passing their boards should be capable of being a good doctor. Same goes with lawyers. Just because someone aced the LSAT and got great grades doesn't make them a better lawyer...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It must be really exhausting being a person of Asian descent if you want to get into medicine. You clearly *must* be that much better than basically all races. The MCAT and gpas of med school matriculants speak for themselves:



On the flip side, this means I'll go out of my way from now on to go to Asian doctors only, because they clearly must be wayyyyy better than the average because of their race of they want a shot.

Maybe we should bring affirmative action lawsuits to multibillion dollar industries like professional sports that clearly don't have enough diversity because they draft players based on skill and not diversity. How many Asian and Hispanic players can you name in the NBA or NFL. Those leagues are allowed to ignore diversity in admissions because they draft based on skills alone. If they're allowed, so should universities.

I will engage you since it seems people love to use the NBA as an example of why it is ok not to pursue diversity when it comes to players?

1) The NBA provides entertainment for customers. In order to put forward the best experience, teams draft the "best" players. Unlike in other areas of American life where so-called "merit" is often subjective (i.e., based on who is evaluating and what "standards" they want to use), NBA players show their talents by scoring, defending, etc. which show up in stats

2) Elite colleges are choosing which students get to join their "teams". So long as the students pass a threshold of acceptability when it comes to SATS and grades, whatever that may be (it seems like Harvard uses the 98th percentile for SATS/ACTs), then they take into account a number of factors including the race, geography, ECs, etc. These schools aren't picking these students to satisfy the needs of the public or consumers. These colleges aren't admitting the kids with only the highest SATs and grades. If that were the case, there still wouldn't be enough room to accommodate all the kids with perfect scores, so then what?

Also, I have a problem with your notion that someone getting a higher score or grades would make them a better doctor. Any doctor passing their boards should be capable of being a good doctor. Same goes with lawyers. Just because someone aced the LSAT and got great grades doesn't make them a better lawyer...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) The cost of the lottery ticket is higher for Asian American kids than Black kids. I get that at some point admissions is a lottery for the most selective schools, but you cannot get around the fact that the floor of SAT scores is much lower for Black and Hispanic students than Asian ones.
2) I am not confident that AOs appreciate and take into account the huge differences within the Asian American community with regard to income and parent education.

Honest question, why aren't you screaming from the rooftops about the mostly-white legacy students who make up 30% or so of the incoming classes of these universities, compared to the less than 5% of black kids? You know that it's much more likely one of those kids "stole" the spot others think they are entitled to. How much does *their* lottery ticket cost?

Anonymous wrote:It must be really exhausting being a person of Asian descent if you want to get into medicine. You clearly *must* be that much better than basically all races. The MCAT and gpas of med school matriculants speak for themselves:



On the flip side, this means I'll go out of my way from now on to go to Asian doctors only, because they clearly must be wayyyyy better than the average because of their race of they want a shot.

Maybe we should bring affirmative action lawsuits to multibillion dollar industries like professional sports that clearly don't have enough diversity because they draft players based on skill and not diversity. How many Asian and Hispanic players can you name in the NBA or NFL. Those leagues are allowed to ignore diversity in admissions because they draft based on skills alone. If they're allowed, so should universities.