I Support AA.





Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Discus: College Admissions: 2002 - 2003 Archive: March 2003 Archive: I Support AA.
By MICA on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 04:10 pm: Edit

I am white and I support affirmative action. It doesn't exclude white people from these schools like you guys make it seem. The schools are still 80 percent white. You need to have some diversity. I definitely would not want to attend a school that is 100 percent full of rich, stuck up kids who are all the same. You make it seem like because of AA no white students have any chances of getting accepted into an elite university, but its not the case. Although you may disagree, many minorities are at a disadvantage and don't have the same resources to achieve what other white students have. Schools are just trying to give them a chance. Obviously they are deserving of their admittance if they are successful within the school.

By Jiang on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 04:57 pm: Edit

AA does not help Asians, who unlike the blacks, have overcome obvious cultural and language barriers.

You are wrong. There are limited spaces. By admitting a less qualified underrepresented minority, you are denying an Asian or white a spot. It does make a difference in borderline cases.

AA is counter productive. Qualifies URMs enter college with the stigma that they were admitted with lower standards. Unqualified URMs fail their way through and lose respect. AA just causes more racial animosity and deepens the wounds of racism.

The best solution is to ignore race entirely, and give special advantages to the poor, regardless of race. Poor Asians and whites are probably worse off than rich blacks.

By aa on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 05:49 pm: Edit

Yes! AA ROCKS! If colleges were to end AA, they'd have to end legacy, residency, and gender status. If you take away aa in the admissions process, you're taking away what it means to be human.

By Nkemdilim on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 06:14 pm: Edit

I'n a qualified person (I don't like the label urm) who is stigma-free. No spots are reserved for anyone. people earn their spots. Colleges could even be arbritrary in their admissions decisions so qualification isn't much of an issue and is just a load of crap.

By Tim (Tim) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 06:17 pm: Edit

"If colleges were to end AA, they'd have to end legacy, residency, and gender status. "

Good idea. Take away AA and all that other BS too.

Tim

By Jiang on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:14 pm: Edit

"If colleges were to end AA, they'd have to end legacy, residency, and gender status. If you take away aa in the admissions process, you're taking away what it means to be human."

Multiple wrongs do not make a right. Those should also be eliminated.

By MICA on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:34 pm: Edit

But honestly, would you want to go to a university that is 100% white people?(or maybe 10% Asian). I appreciate the diversity AA brings, and don't think it should be abolished AT ALL!!!

By Jiang on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Why don't they make it financial based? how different will a suburban black kid be from a rich white kid? I think a white kid living in a ghetto would be much more different than a suburban white kid.

Financially based AA does not eliminate diversity. Most URMs are poor and would still benefit

And why 100% white? Are you implying that all URMs are underqualified? Racist?

By Incognito (Incognito) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:38 pm: Edit

I agree with Tim.

The source of racial inequities in this counry is not on the College campus. Rather, it is in the poor ghetto elementary schools (that many URMs attend) that fail to provide adequate education.

By Lucky (Lucky) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:49 pm: Edit

MICA, not all of us "guys make it seem" as if affirmative action "excludes white people from these schools." I don't support affirmative action and I am multiracial. Furthermore I wouldn't want to attend "a school that is 100 percent full of rich, stuck up kids who are all the same" either; however this does not necessarily equate to only white students. Wealthy black students are just as likely to be snobby but even within the category of "stuck up kids," they're not all the same.

I agree that many racial minorities are at a disadvantage and often don't have the same resources to achieve what other white students can but there are many low-cost or free college preparatory programs that are available especially for those that are underprivileged. I attended one of these programs for both of my high school years, and information on their non-profit efforts can be found at http://www.trioprograms.org/clearinghouse/.

Not that anyone above has said this (so I don't get hammered for misquoting) but from my personal experience in the Admissions Office, when it comes down to two "borderline" people, we either admit both or (much more often) reject both. Race doesn't figure into it as these sections (name, geographic location) are separated from the applications and a randomized student ID number is assigned to each file.

I didn't check race boxes on my application nor did I write my essay on anything race or ethnic related (which is the only other case in which adcom members would know that about you).

Just my $0.02,
Lucky

By asdf on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:51 pm: Edit

Yeah, there's some pretty major flaws in the primary level of education and in secondary schools as well.

Just a thought, even if there is no cultural diversity in a school, there's bound to be some diversity in philosophy/religion, political affiliation, geographical location, financial status, etc. So what difference does it make with or without AA? You get diversity one way or the other. How much diversity does a school need? Everyone is unique anyways.

By ... on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 09:36 pm: Edit

hmm how do you explain the discrimination in the case that a rich black kid takes the place of a poor white kid. If AA is to promote URM's given less opportunity, isn't it true that in this that the URM has more opportunity? The whole reasoning behind the purpose of AA being to help urm's with less opportunities seems to be based on financial status. Then why not make it based entirely on finance, rather than on race?

By cãozinho on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 10:35 pm: Edit

I don't think it's our business. It's the COLLEGE'S choice whether or not it wants to accept you. It's not like you have some fundamental right to be accepted or anything. If some university decided to accept more blacks and hispanics than whites, well, whose choice is it? Yours?

By Jiang on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 01:51 am: Edit

"I don't think it's our business. It's the COLLEGE'S choice whether or not it wants to accept you. It's not like you have some fundamental right to be accepted or anything. If some university decided to accept more blacks and hispanics than whites, well, whose choice is it? Yours?"

It's our business for state funded schools. On another level, it's our business when discrimination exists in society.

By MICA on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 03:56 pm: Edit

"And why 100% white? Are you implying that all URMs are underqualified? Racist? "

No i'm not racist, and like i said, these scools are already around 70-80% white. eliminate AA and of course these figures will increase significantly; close to 100%.

By Jiang on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 04:15 pm: Edit

"No i'm not racist, and like i said, these scools are already around 70-80% white. eliminate AA and of course these figures will increase significantly; close to 100%."

AA was eliminated in the University of California and URM numbers have not dropped. Why? Financial background is taken into consideration and the URMs who need the help get it.

You should stop thinking in terms of race. This is why racism exists.

By your local mayor on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 04:47 pm: Edit

and I'm an anti-Affirmative Action kind of guy.

By 7 on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 05:24 pm: Edit

"No i'm not racist, and like i said, these scools are already around 70-80% white. eliminate AA and of course these figures will increase significantly; close to 100%."

If AA was eliminated, the number of Asians in top universities would SURGE. Not the White. Asian applicants have a harder time getting in because they're over represented in universities. I'm not to sure, but the average SAT of Asians in schools like Berkeley or the Ivy's are the highest averages around. They consist only 5%+ of the population yet they have a strong presence of around 30% in the top universities, even with the tougher requirements put on them. So i would say the number of whites would go down significantly, as the room would be filled by qualified people, who aren't all just white people but are everywhere and anywhere.

By p on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 05:28 pm: Edit

Without AA, the number of black students "might" actually increase. In countries like Canada where there aren't any significant AA influence on acceptances; diversity is still there. Blacks are still present, as they feel they must work harder to be on par with the whites or asians or whoever. Blacks in my city aren't stupid at all, as they get no special benefit and would fall behind if they slacked off. I see all these people in USA who slack off and get in just because they're an URM, which really encourages this to continue.

The only way to make things fair is to better the socio-economic situation as a whole, just letting underqualified people enter then fall out is not the solution at all.

By p on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 05:43 pm: Edit

An example where you actually catch up because you get no benefits is the Vietnamese (i guess this applys to Jews, who are farther ahead, but have been in america for longer; the polish etc). Although a lot of them are still poor, a significant number has been able to get into top schools. They got no benifits, and they are no better than the blacks economically. But this does not apply to all asians though, a lot of the chinese or taiwanese i see in America today come from million dollar homes back in asia.

By Tim (Tim) on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:05 pm: Edit

"AA was eliminated in the University of California and URM numbers have not dropped. Why?"

There's actually rumours that the UC system has done it's best to racially bias admissions in favor of URMs agains the referendum...

Some ways I have heard are through increasing the weight of the SAT II Spanish test which is a joke for immigrants and the use of the word "overcome" as in "Student X has overcome a lot of hardship in his life," where the "overcomes" are almost all URMs.

Tim

By ??? on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:18 pm: Edit

Tim, those are just rumors. Care for any back-up?

By Ton on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 08:47 pm: Edit

Interesting discussion guys/girls. I have a question though. I've heard, or i guess we've all heard, that minorities are at an advantage in getting into (elite) colleges. But then one of you guys said that being Chinese actually hurts one's chances. Is this true? I'm chinese and i guess it would be true because all the chinese parents make their kids study like 5 hrs a day (maybe a little exageration but not that much) and like everyone gets 1500+'s on SATS. So would it be more beneficial to not list your ethnicity then if i'm chinese? Oh yeah about that AA, i don't know much about it but it seems that those who are against it are those who don't get to benefit from it and vice versa (but that's just my opinion) :)

By sauce on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 09:11 pm: Edit

Tim, the UC system doesn't racially bias admissions. As Jiang said, it is because the UC system takes financial background into consideration.

If there were really racial bias in the UC system, how would you explain the Asian majority on some UC campuses? Bear in mind that Hispanics and whites vastly outnumber Asians in the state of California, so it's not because there are more Asians that apply to the UCs.

By 9 on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 10:23 pm: Edit

Ton, being ASIAN hurts in general. Not just chinese; but Vietnamese, japanese, korean (i think anything yellow, i'm not kidding). For example, if you had a 1550+ or whatever on your SATs, and a white guy gets a 1500+, the white guy gets in. If a black with a 1400+ is faced off against the white and the asian, the black gets in. It's supposedly to balance off the "races" so there would be more diversity, yet universities with no AA have more diversity. Funny isn't it?

By geez on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 11:07 pm: Edit

you guys are all whiny morons, no offense. if you had half-decent transcripts/ECs than you wouldnt be ossessed with this AA stuff. I mean, im not a "minority" but i am confident that my stats will get me into a good college. im not gonna worry "if i go up against a black guy" and what not, because ur application is looked at individually. instead ofcomplining aboutbeing gipped, why dont u gostudy for ur next math test. doesnt matter if ur white etc., your transcripts will do the talking.

By GO BLUE! on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 08:54 pm: Edit

I'm white and I've already been accepted into the University of Michigan - Honors Program. I support Michigan's system 100%. Part of what appeals to me the most about Michigan is its diversity. By the way, athletes get the same number of extra points as URMs, so it's not just about AA. And you don't hear a lot of people at Michigan screaming that our football players couldn't get in based on academic achievement. At Michigan, there's a little bit of everything -- just the way I like it!

By a on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 09:28 pm: Edit

GO BLUE, what are your stats? Are you out of state?

By roller on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 09:33 pm: Edit

Jiang: "You should stop thinking in terms of race. This is why racism exists. "

that's bs. race consciousness is necessary. racism does not with ignoring race. racism ends with understanding and tolerance. race must be an issue discussed openly, frankly, and by everyone, becasue discriminamtion and the socio-economic problems of society exist along the lines of race. it must be adressed. as long as there is racism, race-consciousness must remain.

the personal AA "disaster stories" are so inaccurate and misleading. white kid 1600 4.3 -denied. black kid - 1300 3.9 accepted. those were made up, but good examples of the misleading things i've seen on this site. anti-AA people jusxtapose the two as if the admissions office actually sat and weighed them vs. each other, and accepted the black kid. sorry but it does not work like that. the stats are also often incomplete, disregarding other important factors, such as the essay, ECs and awards.

the super-applicants, who are white and being rejected are losing spots to more interesting, less affluent, more talented white kids.

By sauce on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 09:42 pm: Edit

"race consciousness is necessary. racism does not [end] with ignoring race."

I fail to see your logic here.

Assume that we were all the same race. We would therefore stop considering what race someone else was because that idea would not exist. If we don't consider another person's race at all, we would not have to deal with racism.

I do agree with everything else you've said. There is no direct competition between applicants of different race for admissions.

By Jiang on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 09:50 pm: Edit

roller: what do you say of my first post in this thread? AA IS racism. It causes racial division as the different races are now enemies.

And as sauce said, your post lacks logic. I think the correct word is racial tolerance. What I meant to say is that racist policies that divide races do not lead to racial tolerance.

By roller on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 10:01 pm: Edit

"Assume that we were all the same race. We would therefore stop considering what race someone else was because that idea would not exist. If we don't consider another person's race at all, we would not have to deal with racism."

yes, that's true in the hypothetical, but i don't think your hypothetical is ideal. there are differences; people look different. and that is a good thing.

Jiang made the argument that ignoring race is ideal, but it's obvioulsy not. racism is deliberate! how then will there be diversity, and ultimately equality, if those things are left to chance?

the issues of race cannot be openly discussed, because they're too "divisive." I think that's crap. nobody wants to talk, but everyone knows there is still racism. ignoring race is tantamount to ignoring racism.

ignoring the diferrence between black, white and yellow would be to ignore the fact that "blacks" are under siege in the racist war on drugs, or other such racism. ignoring someone's blackness, is to ignore the racism directed at them because of their blackness.

if you have any free time read "Race Matters" by princeton professor Cornell West. it's a great book; deals with the issue better than i can.

By Jiang on Saturday, February 15, 2003 - 12:28 am: Edit

simply put--AA is counter-effective

more racism does not fight racism

the best solution is financially backed AA

By GO BLUE! on Saturday, February 15, 2003 - 03:35 pm: Edit

a, you wanted my stats. 1440 SAT. 3.7 GPA at competitive private school. 10 honors and AP classes. In-state (10 points). Legacy (4 points). I think they give me 4 points for my school. That's 18 free points just for being me - almost as much as URM!

By Jiang on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 12:36 am: Edit

2 wrongs don't make a right

HTH

By GO BLUE! on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 12:47 am: Edit

My point was that people make such a fuss about the 20 points awarded to URMs. Really, it's not that big a deal. I got 18 points for things completely unrelated to my academic achievement. The University assigns points to certain qualities because they are trying to balance the class. They have an obligation to educate the citizens of Michigan - so they make it a little easier for us. They want to encourage legacies - because legacies donate money at higher rates than non-legacies. They want to have competitive athletic teams. They want people from under-represented states, etc. Going to college isn't just about who can score the highest grades. Look if you want to go to a school that's all Asians I really don't care. But I'm looking forward to getting to know different kinds of people - and I think it's going to be a lot more interesting than being in a room with clones of myself.

By roller on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 05:12 pm: Edit

damn...i am a faggot

By roller on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 11:44 pm: Edit

see. i'd think this would be the last place i'd see such anti-intellectual racist crap. but i gess, not. not to mention homophobia. i better register. so as.s holes like that guy "5:12" don't keep saying sh.it like that. very annoying.

By my purpose is served on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 12:20 am: Edit

ur right roller i am trying to p.iss. u off. ^_^ o no did i annoy u? hah

By pisces on Thursday, February 20, 2003 - 11:18 am: Edit

Food for thought

http://www.middlebury.edu/~pubaff/news_2003/affirm_action.html

Most interesting quote from article:

... “highly selective colleges cannot obtain the diversity they seek except by seeking it directly.”

By your local mayor on Thursday, February 20, 2003 - 05:21 pm: Edit

what's in it for my white-male self?

By AA Lover on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 01:22 pm: Edit

It's all about you, isn't it. Well...for one thing, if you prefer to be with people just like you, then you should go to Bob Jones University or West Point, or someplace else where you will be guaranteed that there will be a bunch of white Republicans. If, on the other hand, you want to interact with people who are more interesting than yourself, then you might just have to deal with AA. Honestly, if you can't make the grade at Michigan or the many, many other institutions that practice AA in admissions, maybe you should just give up and go live in a cave. It's not that tough.

By Me on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 05:54 pm: Edit

How does being a white male make someone uninteresting? I'm sure there are both plenty of uninteresting AND interesting white males as well as males and females of every race.

By supernova on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 01:37 pm: Edit

I believe that an black person should be highly offended and insulted by AA

If i were african american i wouldn't feel good about applying to Yale and being accepted...left wondering if i was accepted b/c i was truly qualified or if it was b/c i was black.

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 08:15 am: Edit

I really don't know why people are so distraught over UMich's policy when the other factors (Prestige of School, Rigor of Curriculum, Alumni Factor, Standardized Test Scores, Income Level, Geographic Location combined) weigh more than the underrepresented minority category.

Most of these underrepresented minorities attend school where they will NOT get the full benefits of a quality education, quality school, all 12pts for standardized test scores, or alumni status.

"Race-neutral" categories (doesn't mention race) are nowhere near color-blind.

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 08:15 am: Edit

I really don't know why people are so distraught over UMich's policy when the other factors (Prestige of School, Rigor of Curriculum, Alumni Factor, Standardized Test Scores, Income Level, Geographic Location combined) weigh more than the underrepresented minority category.

Most of these underrepresented minorities attend school where they will NOT get the full benefits of a quality education, quality school, all 12pts for standardized test scores, or alumni status.

"Race-neutral" categories (doesn't mention race) are no where near color-blind.

By Cookie (Cookie) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 12:58 pm: Edit

Hey Tenisghs, Long time, no post!

By Cookie (Cookie) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 12:59 pm: Edit

Hey, Tenisghs. Long time, no post.

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 12:59 pm: Edit

Yup Cookie, I am back ready to debate!

By Svansviek (Svansviek) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 03:58 am: Edit

I'm (Nkemdilim) back and registered.

By Cookie (Cookie) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 12:56 pm: Edit

What's up with the name. It's a little different... But it's all good.

By Jdf418 (Jdf418) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 12:26 am: Edit

why does everyone assume that URM are always less qualified or somehow incapable of doing the work at great institutions? do you assume college admissions officers are dumb? if they spot a HARD ASS WORKING URM who has done great in their situation and is going to do whatever it takes to make a success out of themselves what is wrong with extending them that hand. they aren't just letting any black student who applies get in. you have to remember that, LIFE IS UNFAIR TO URMs, colleges just try to even out the barrier a little

By Jdf418 (Jdf418) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 12:28 am: Edit

i would hate to see a college--the world for that matter--without AA. how does an all white campus, workplace (except for the janitors), or neighborhood sound to you? sounds like good ol' 1950's americana to me

By Jdf418 (Jdf418) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 12:32 am: Edit

and i know i am on a rant....

but how about the fact that whites are more likely to be legacies, go to well known high schools, get better education, and therefore are GROOMED to go great schools. you can be as black purple and green as you want and never get that type of opportunity

By Rowan (Rowan) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 01:51 am: Edit

My only comment is about the psychological impact. There have been studies (don't quote me on this; there are always "studies," and I don't know the precise sources here) about the effect that AA and legacy admissions have on the applicants qualifying under them. I know I, personally, would be offended if I were accepted to college because I had been born differently. College is about the academics; never forget that. Diversity is nice, that extra 20% of funding to colleges from alumni is nice, lack of lawsuits from overly-conscious people is also nice, but college is about higher learning: get the grades, test scores, extra-curriculars, show the college you can succeed and contribute to their campus, then you should get into the school.

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 08:29 am: Edit

get the grades, test scores, extra-curriculars, show the college you can succeed and contribute to their campus, then you should get into the school.

Unfortunately, even a student with a perfect GPA and test scores does not indicate guaranteed acceptance. There are brighter students with lesser credentials that colleges want -- not nerds who don't venture out of their school network.

By Incognito (Incognito) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 11:59 am: Edit

"There are brighter students with lesser credentials that colleges want..."

Care to explain?....

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 04:00 pm: Edit

"There are brighter students with lesser credentials that colleges want..."

Care to explain?....

I can explain many situations.
1) This person has a 4.0 GPA 1600 SAT 700-800 SAT IIs. He takes classes that will look good on his high school transcript but no arts. His extracurriculars are great but not extraordinary. This person didn't uniquely challenge himself.

2) This person may have a 1300 SAT 3.8 GPA and 600 - 700 SAT IIs. They take the recommended classes, but this person shines in the arts, especially choral and instrumental music. Their extracurriculars focuses in the arts. This person also did well in his college prep classes. The college admissions office is looking for someone like them! This person has a higher chance of admittance. He is the "diamond in the rough."

Get my point now?

By Incognito (Incognito) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 04:18 pm: Edit

lol Tenisghs. What you said contradicts the beliefs of many people (although not necessarily mine). Most would consider student 1 to be the "brighter" student with "lesser" credentials because he did well on his SAT but did not excell in the "arts"/ECs area. So, according to your previous post, student 1 would be the one that colleges would want, and studnet 2 (the one who is not as "bright" but has more ECs) would be the one that colleges are not looking for. Your statements contradict eachother. Now is that true, or have I just missed something misunderstood your statemetns?...

By Stupid_Guy (Stupid_Guy) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 04:38 pm: Edit

life is precious, and a student should take courses that he is interested in, he should study in the area that intrigues him and live out his dreams. NOT try to take all courses and try to look like the "well rounded" marshmellows that colleges look for. Personally I would accept a 1310 student with 800 m 510 v or vice versa then a 1320 student with 660 m 660 v.
Specialization shows passion and dedication to one's dreams. Well roundedness shows that the kid has less brains than me.

just my 6.02E23 cents

By Cookie (Cookie) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 05:00 pm: Edit

I don't know why college make such a big deal out of SAT's. They don't mean a damn thing.

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 05:02 pm: Edit

Exactly Stupid Guy, I was trying to state that in my previous post.

By Incognito (Incognito) on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 05:03 pm: Edit

soooo...Tenisghs, you think that colleges value ECs, "arts", GPA, and stuff like that more so than the SATs?...

By Tim (Tim) on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 02:42 am: Edit

"1) This person has a 4.0 GPA 1600 SAT 700-800 SAT IIs. He takes classes that will look good on his high school transcript but no arts. His extracurriculars are great but not extraordinary. This person didn't uniquely challenge himself.

2) This person may have a 1300 SAT 3.8 GPA and 600 - 700 SAT IIs. They take the recommended classes, but this person shines in the arts, especially choral and instrumental music. Their extracurriculars focuses in the arts. This person also did well in his college prep classes. The college admissions office is looking for someone like them! This person has a higher chance of admittance. He is the "diamond in the rough." "

WTF? Person Number One did not challenge themselves because they are not interested in arts? Maybe they are interested in maths and science?

I see two different people here - number one should be applying to top-notch school for math, science, or whatever they like. Number two should be applying to top-notch art or music schools which rightly don't care about SATs or grades as much.

Tim

By Tenisghs (Tenisghs) on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 06:50 am: Edit

soooo...Tenisghs, you think that colleges value ECs, "arts", GPA, and stuff like that more so than the SATs?...
====================================
Colleges do look at your test scores, but do you think a college will be impressed if you had the same "application" as 80% of the other applicants? If you shine yourself in a particular area, that will catch the college's attention.

But a person with a 1600 SAT or valedictorian have a 50% acceptance rate.

By Hildegard (Hildegard) on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 09:41 am: Edit

If there wasn't any AA, blacks and hispanics would continue to be in the dark. Don't you see that it is built in their culture? Hispanics come from third world countries, where they don't have a culture of rigorous education. Blacks are somewhat behind as well. They were slaves and evolved slower than whites.
Chinese people are innately studious and overly concerned about intellect.
If you don't try to even the difference between the these four completely different cultures, we'll end up with a world of Chinese CEO's, White Managers, Black technicians, and hispanic janitors. Isn't this fostering racial segregation?

AA is building a new society and slowly making it even by giving opportunities to all races involved--giving each race a chance according to the opportunities they have had. Hence, the 1300 black whose parents didn't encourage and required to study for hours, can equal the 1590 Chinese whose parents have been pushing to study everyday of his life and have brainwashed him into becoming an Ivy hopeful since he was 1-year-old. Or the 1200 Hispanic who has to work every day and whose parents are janitors and don't speak English, as opposed to the 1400 white whose parents went to college and have helped him every evening with homework and paid for some extra EC's.

It makes sense, doesn't it? I'm totally for AA.

By Stupid_Guy (Stupid_Guy) on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 10:45 am: Edit

Chinese food is delicious...
Can somebody tell me who cooks them?

By Dontknow (Dontknow) on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 01:39 pm: Edit

Hildegard, you made some good points.

Jdg418, I totally agree that URM aren't getting picked just because of their ethnicity.

I'm a Hispanic female (senior) and don't feel that I've been offered admissions at schools simply because I'm Mexican. I had to work hard too. Nothing is handed out to anybody.


Report an offensive message on this page    E-mail this page to a friend
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page