LOL. Almost identical.

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~etowne/Spring%202017%20Schedule%20of%20Topics.pdf

http://math.gmu.edu/syllabi/F17/113-006-Bulancea.pdf

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?[/quote]

Just stop with all your racist stereotypes. [/quote]
What in the world is racist? Blacks DO drop out at rates much higher than whites. And then they are stuck with loans, without a degree to show for it. So instead of artificially lowering admission standards so URMs can get into schools for which they would not qualify, they get into the schools that are more in line with their academic record and projected success.

There wasn't a single thing in there that was racist. You liberals just resort to that when you can't argue the facts.[/quote]

Wait. Do you think higher-ranked schools are [i]harder[/i]?

Did you even go to college?



[/quote]
Yes, #1 in my class - and a terrific academic scholarship as a result. Thank you for inquiring.

You can't even follow the conversation. Of COURSE harder-ranked schools are harder. That's why they shouldn't be lowering the standards so that people (URMs) are getting in when they would NOT get in if standards were applied equally across-the-board. You have a group of whites with 3.9s and 4.0s, used to acing classes and tests, and then the AA entrants with 3.3 and 3.4, who struggle to keep up with their peers. (And they do....students admitted under lower AA standards are tracked, and they need significant tutoring.) Even so, the majority of black students do NOT graduate, and what's more.....due to their lower SES, they end up with much more debt than whites. (These are all facts. Black students borrow more.)

It would be better if the 3.3 and 3.4 students ended up at a university where their peers - white and black - were at that level as well. They would be more likely to complete the program.

[/quote]

#1 at Liberty, huh?

You can argue that there is a different peer group but the calculus 101 class at Harvard isn’t really any harder than the one at George Mason. If anything it’s easier because the students will have more resources available to them. More TAs.

There may be more interesting research happening, more intellectual conversations in the hallway, or more unique course offerings but Harvard isn’t inherently HARDER than other schools.
[/quote]
And you have to kick off your response with an insult. You're a liberal, huh?

[/quote]

I don’t mind going low.

People actively trying to shit on others? I don’t hold back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

You nasty liberals are really impossible. How is wanting to include poor whites in AA, rather than reserving all benefits to blacks, racist?

And it's very telling how tolerant you are with posters who call low-income whites "white trash" and tell whites to STFU. You are a BIG anti-white racist. YOU are disgraceful.

So you want to keep racial preference but just add SES?

Not specifically, but it would work out that way. And that's because black students, ON AVERAGE, are from a lower SES than whites. (It's been reported that the average net worth of a white family is 10x that of a black family, ON AVERAGE.) Thus, that means that the new AA guidelines, using SES, would still be of immense benefit to black kids disadvantaged by poorer homes and uneducated parents. The difference is that 1) white kids who are also disadvantaged by a low SES would ALSO benefit from AA policies, and 2) black kids from affluent families, where Mom is a lawyer and Dad an obstetrician, would not be considered for admittance using AA standards.

Now, what is unfair or racist about that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

You nasty liberals are really impossible. How is wanting to include poor whites in AA, rather than reserving all benefits to blacks, racist?

And it's very telling how tolerant you are with posters who call low-income whites "white trash" and tell whites to STFU. You are a BIG anti-white racist. YOU are disgraceful.

So you want to keep racial preference but just add SES?

And don’t you think this already happens? Do you really think a first gen college student from Appalachia is going to be evaluated the same way a UMC kid from NoVa regardless of their race? Do you think schools aiming for geographic diversity in their class make up is a bad thing?

Of course it happens. Top schools look for diversity in many aspects - SES, first gen, special talents, leadership, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

You nasty liberals are really impossible. How is wanting to include poor whites in AA, rather than reserving all benefits to blacks, racist?

And it's very telling how tolerant you are with posters who call low-income whites "white trash" and tell whites to STFU. You are a BIG anti-white racist. YOU are disgraceful.

So you want to keep racial preference but just add SES?

And don’t you think this already happens? Do you really think a first gen college student from Appalachia is going to be evaluated the same way a UMC kid from NoVa regardless of their race? Do you think schools aiming for geographic diversity in their class make up is a bad thing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

You nasty liberals are really impossible. How is wanting to include poor whites in AA, rather than reserving all benefits to blacks, racist?

And it's very telling how tolerant you are with posters who call low-income whites "white trash" and tell whites to STFU. You are a BIG anti-white racist. YOU are disgraceful.

Clap clap clap clap

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

Just stop with all your racist stereotypes.

What in the world is racist? Blacks DO drop out at rates much higher than whites. And then they are stuck with loans, without a degree to show for it. So instead of artificially lowering admission standards so URMs can get into schools for which they would not qualify, they get into the schools that are more in line with their academic record and projected success.

There wasn't a single thing in there that was racist. You liberals just resort to that when you can't argue the facts.

Wait. Do you think higher-ranked schools are harder?

Did you even go to college?

Yes, #1 in my class - and a terrific academic scholarship as a result. Thank you for inquiring.

You can't even follow the conversation. Of COURSE harder-ranked schools are harder. That's why they shouldn't be lowering the standards so that people (URMs) are getting in when they would NOT get in if standards were applied equally across-the-board. You have a group of whites with 3.9s and 4.0s, used to acing classes and tests, and then the AA entrants with 3.3 and 3.4, who struggle to keep up with their peers. (And they do....students admitted under lower AA standards are tracked, and they need significant tutoring.) Even so, the majority of black students do NOT graduate, and what's more.....due to their lower SES, they end up with much more debt than whites. (These are all facts. Black students borrow more.)

It would be better if the 3.3 and 3.4 students ended up at a university where their peers - white and black - were at that level as well. They would be more likely to complete the program.

#1 at Liberty, huh?

You can argue that there is a different peer group but the calculus 101 class at Harvard isn’t really any harder than the one at George Mason. If anything it’s easier because the students will have more resources available to them. More TAs.

There may be more interesting research happening, more intellectual conversations in the hallway, or more unique course offerings but Harvard isn’t inherently HARDER than other schools.

And you have to kick off your response with an insult. You're a liberal, huh?

Do you think schools should be compelled to make up their classes based on some sort of formula using only academic test scores? Harvard (and everyone else) is trying to come up with some sort of ideal class composition that happens along multiple axes (race being one but far from the only). They have a secret sauce that they protect so that if you are offered admission, your peers and experience will give you the exposure they want for you in your four years. So they want kids they identify as “smart” or “going to make an impact” in some way other than only using GPAs and test scores. This is why this idea of “taking someone else’s spot” is so bizarre. Even if they didn’t take the black kid, they wouldn’t want your kid with the higher stats because nothing distinguishes them from the other members of the class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

You nasty liberals are really impossible. How is wanting to include poor whites in AA, rather than reserving all benefits to blacks, racist?

And it's very telling how tolerant you are with posters who call low-income whites "white trash" and tell whites to STFU. You are a BIG anti-white racist. YOU are disgraceful.

So you want to keep racial preference but just add SES?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

Just stop with all your racist stereotypes.

What in the world is racist? Blacks DO drop out at rates much higher than whites. And then they are stuck with loans, without a degree to show for it. So instead of artificially lowering admission standards so URMs can get into schools for which they would not qualify, they get into the schools that are more in line with their academic record and projected success.

There wasn't a single thing in there that was racist. You liberals just resort to that when you can't argue the facts.

Wait. Do you think higher-ranked schools are harder?

Did you even go to college?

Yes, #1 in my class - and a terrific academic scholarship as a result. Thank you for inquiring.

You can't even follow the conversation. Of COURSE harder-ranked schools are harder. That's why they shouldn't be lowering the standards so that people (URMs) are getting in when they would NOT get in if standards were applied equally across-the-board. You have a group of whites with 3.9s and 4.0s, used to acing classes and tests, and then the AA entrants with 3.3 and 3.4, who struggle to keep up with their peers. (And they do....students admitted under lower AA standards are tracked, and they need significant tutoring.) Even so, the majority of black students do NOT graduate, and what's more.....due to their lower SES, they end up with much more debt than whites. (These are all facts. Black students borrow more.)

It would be better if the 3.3 and 3.4 students ended up at a university where their peers - white and black - were at that level as well. They would be more likely to complete the program.

#1 at Liberty, huh?

You can argue that there is a different peer group but the calculus 101 class at Harvard isn’t really any harder than the one at George Mason. If anything it’s easier because the students will have more resources available to them. More TAs.

There may be more interesting research happening, more intellectual conversations in the hallway, or more unique course offerings but Harvard isn’t inherently HARDER than other schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

You nasty liberals are really impossible. How is wanting to include poor whites in AA, rather than reserving all benefits to blacks, racist?

And it's very telling how tolerant you are with posters who call low-income whites "white trash" and tell whites to STFU. You are a BIG anti-white racist. YOU are disgraceful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a number of reasons, I think some form of race-based affirmative action probably makes sense. At the same time, I get why some think it’s unfair.

That said, I struggle to understand why white people care so much. I mean, If you’re a white kid kept out of Harvard by affirmative action, where do you end up going? Brown? Cornell? Georgetown? Is that really so bad?

This just feels like another parable about the power of marketing—here, the universities’.

You're assuming that the white kids rejected in favor of black kids with worse grades are getting into a comparable institution. If all institutions are favoring minorities, the white kid runs into the same problem - and, depending on the program, may not get accepted at all. That's why there are so many white kids with a 3.7 rejected from all med schools, while a minority with a 3.4 gets acceptances from multiple schools.

No I’m not. Harvard is better than those schools.

What are you talking about? You're acting as if a white kid with excellent grades and scores gets bumped out of a top school due to the lower standards for minorities, he'll get into SOME sort of decent school. I am telling you that it is so bad that WHITE students with a 3.6 applying to med school will be laughed out by virtually every med school in the country, whereas a black kid with a 3.3 still has a very good chance of getting accepted.

But what you are saying is just racist bullshit. My daughter and dozens of her classmates and friends in DC, Montgomery County, and NOVA, public & private schools, rich, middle, working class, white, black, Hispanic, Asian, all got into exactly the level of schools they deserved to get into. I can’t think of one person who had to drop down a level or anyone who was in over his/her head. You are exaggerating everything way beyond reality to incite racial grievance. You remind me of David Duke with this bullshit.

If you are going to pull out that old "racist, racist!!" BS one more time, I'm going to stop debating with you.

You're coming up with anecdotes. Your daughter....her classmates....her friends. I am telling you as someone who has inside knowledge that 1) URMs are admitted with much lower grades/scores than whites, 2) they take on significantly more debt, 3) they require much more private tutoring than their classmates, including black classmates. who were admitted under the "normal" standards, and 4) the drop-out rate among blacks is significantly higher than whites.

And what is racist about the proposal that kicked this thread off: Change the focus from race-based AA to SES-based AA? That way, we would be offering low-income whites a "step up" as well to low-income blacks. Some of you liberals are so anti-white (white trash, the whites need to STFU), that you want to make sure ALL the benefits go exclusively to black kids an send high-achieving, but poor, whitey to community college. Now THAT is racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

+1.

The whole thing ia a diagrace.

For whites and for blacks and for Asian Americans and for Hispanics.

Time to move on.

Yes, and what's also disgraceful is when a black poster* says that high-achieving white kids rejected as a result need to STFU about it, or another poster refers to "white trash," or still another say that the smart, top-scoring white kid needs to suck it up at community college so that a mediocre minority can go the a 4-year University,

*I assume that poster was black. I can't see how a white person would say that white peoples need to STFU.

“Disgraceful”?

It’s disgraceful that racist POSs like you walk on earth.

ME???? I don't hear you calling the liberal calling low-income Caucasians "white trash". Or that white people need to STFU. Or that white people can just go to community college so blacks can go to university.

Now what would be racist would be if someone were to call low-income blacks "black scum". Or the black people need to STFU. Or that black people can just go to community college and let the whites go to university.

See how that works, you racist POS.

I DGAF what the other posters say. I’m calling YOU out for your bad actions. YOU want to shit all over black people. That makes YOU a racist POS. YOU are disgraceful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, the drop-out rate for blacks is disappointing. Less than half who enter graduate within six years, whereas the majority of whites do.

Which brings up another consideration....besides being unfair to whites with better grades, is it to the benefit of the taxpayers to fund black stidents admitted under the lower AA standards with Pell grants, subsidized federal loans, and so forth? Or, for that matter, is it doing a disservice to let black kids into a competitive program to which they not qualify without the AA "boost" - only for them to take in loans, drop out, and have no degree to show for it?

Wouldn't it be better for these students for them to be admitted under their own merits to whatever achool they would normally qualify for? That way, they are with their peer group - in terms of academic achievement - and more likely to complete the program and earn a college-level salary?

Just stop with all your racist stereotypes.

What in the world is racist? Blacks DO drop out at rates much higher than whites. And then they are stuck with loans, without a degree to show for it. So instead of artificially lowering admission standards so URMs can get into schools for which they would not qualify, they get into the schools that are more in line with their academic record and projected success.

There wasn't a single thing in there that was racist. You liberals just resort to that when you can't argue the facts.

Wait. Do you think higher-ranked schools are harder?

Did you even go to college?

Yes, #1 in my class - and a terrific academic scholarship as a result. Thank you for inquiring.

You can't even follow the conversation. Of COURSE harder-ranked schools are harder. That's why they shouldn't be lowering the standards so that people (URMs) are getting in when they would NOT get in if standards were applied equally across-the-board. You have a group of whites with 3.9s and 4.0s, used to acing classes and tests, and then the AA entrants with 3.3 and 3.4, who struggle to keep up with their peers. (And they do....students admitted under lower AA standards are tracked, and they need significant tutoring.) Even so, the majority of black students do NOT graduate, and what's more.....due to their lower SES, they end up with much more debt than whites. (These are all facts. Black students borrow more.)

It would be better if the 3.3 and 3.4 students ended up at a university where their peers - white and black - were at that level as well. They would be more likely to complete the program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a number of reasons, I think some form of race-based affirmative action probably makes sense. At the same time, I get why some think it’s unfair.

That said, I struggle to understand why white people care so much. I mean, If you’re a white kid kept out of Harvard by affirmative action, where do you end up going? Brown? Cornell? Georgetown? Is that really so bad?

This just feels like another parable about the power of marketing—here, the universities’.

You're assuming that the white kids rejected in favor of black kids with worse grades are getting into a comparable institution. If all institutions are favoring minorities, the white kid runs into the same problem - and, depending on the program, may not get accepted at all. That's why there are so many white kids with a 3.7 rejected from all med schools, while a minority with a 3.4 gets acceptances from multiple schools.

No I’m not. Harvard is better than those schools.

What are you talking about? You're acting as if a white kid with excellent grades and scores gets bumped out of a top school due to the lower standards for minorities, he'll get into SOME sort of decent school. I am telling you that it is so bad that WHITE students with a 3.6 applying to med school will be laughed out by virtually every med school in the country, whereas a black kid with a 3.3 still has a very good chance of getting accepted.

But what you are saying is just racist bullshit. My daughter and dozens of her classmates and friends in DC, Montgomery County, and NOVA, public & private schools, rich, middle, working class, white, black, Hispanic, Asian, all got into exactly the level of schools they deserved to get into. I can’t think of one person who had to drop down a level or anyone who was in over his/her head. You are exaggerating everything way beyond reality to incite racial grievance. You remind me of David Duke with this bullshit.