(06-23-2014 09:48 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:19 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:07 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:03 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I can't believe some of you don't want brown people to have a chance to go to school over someone deserving.

I get the sarcasm; however, if that is the case I wish schools would just say that and stop with all this "affirmative action" BS. Just put it in their policies and make it public that "x" amount of minorities will be given admission each year at the expense of some other more qualified individual.

But is that truly fair? Do you think Harvard wants the best or someone who is mediocre but they have to accept them because of AA?

If AA becomes the case for enrollment of college, there needs to be a clause put in that those let in for AA must attend 90% of all classes, carry a full load, and cannot withdraw and re-admit in the same academic year.

No, it obviously isn't fair but fairness is pretty one sided with regard to this topic.

I'm all for someone trying to better themselves. But in real life the playing field is somewhat level. What's going to be next? You have to pass so many of a race so they can graduate? We need to willing to help those who want to help themselves.

While I don't agree, she never said "trump". You can try to read between-the-lines and come to that conclusion, but that attribution is wrong in this case.

Now, in some ways I'm torn. I do think that race adds context to other metrics used. I also know that the repeal of AA would do absolutely nothing as far as perception is concerned; people will always use that as an excuse of why their kid didn't get in somewhere.

But then again I think someone should get in because of their own qualifications.

If we repeal AA any time soon, there's going to have to be a real campaign. Not for the benefit of those who'd already be on board with it, but the people who would face the negative impact. There would have to be a real message.

(06-23-2014 09:19 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:07 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:03 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I can't believe some of you don't want brown people to have a chance to go to school over someone deserving.

I get the sarcasm; however, if that is the case I wish schools would just say that and stop with all this "affirmative action" BS. Just put it in their policies and make it public that "x" amount of minorities will be given admission each year at the expense of some other more qualified individual.

But is that truly fair? Do you think Harvard wants the best or someone who is mediocre but they have to accept them because of AA?

If AA becomes the case for enrollment of college, there needs to be a clause put in that those let in for AA must attend 90% of all classes, carry a full load, and cannot withdraw and re-admit in the same academic year.

How would they do this? People who get in because of AA don't know that they got in for that reason.

I don't even know whether I got in for that reason or not.

(06-23-2014 10:23 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:19 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:07 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:03 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I can't believe some of you don't want brown people to have a chance to go to school over someone deserving.

I get the sarcasm; however, if that is the case I wish schools would just say that and stop with all this "affirmative action" BS. Just put it in their policies and make it public that "x" amount of minorities will be given admission each year at the expense of some other more qualified individual.

But is that truly fair? Do you think Harvard wants the best or someone who is mediocre but they have to accept them because of AA?

If AA becomes the case for enrollment of college, there needs to be a clause put in that those let in for AA must attend 90% of all classes, carry a full load, and cannot withdraw and re-admit in the same academic year.

How would they do this? People who get in because of AA don't know that they got in for that reason.

I don't even know whether I got in for that reason or not.

I guess you got a point.

I still hold a serious grudge for having to take out student loans to go to school, and then there were those who never attended class, got every grant possible, so much they also got a refund check every semester and at that point they'd drop down to 1 class a semester or withdraw and then re-admit the next semester.

Kinda frustrating to be told I couldn't get this grant or that grant, but people like that could. It was all races. Wasn't just black kids. White kids were doing it to.

Didn't see it happen with any of the foreign students.

Affirmative action may have had some valid use in the past. It is now simply and slap in the face to any AA that has excelled in life and wants to be treated with equality.

AA is only valid if you are choosing between equally qualified candidates. If you have 10 kids with 1600 SATs then you do make a selection based on other factors. However, you simply dumb down the process if you are choosing between 10 1600 kids and say you need one latino kid so you have to settle for one with a lower score. It also isn't fair to the other kids who have 1600s.

The ultimate result is what Clarence Thomas has talked about, a 1400 is a black kids 1600. Going forward a black kid need not shoot for a 1600 because he is not on an equal playing field, his inferiority can be explained away and a lesser system created. Again, it creates a verifiable system of "you're smart, for a black kid."

Too bad the rest of the world cannot be like a professional sports team. The cream rises to the top....the best and most deserving play.

Socioeconomic factors are what should be used to make a choice between otherwise equal candidates. In practice that may become de facto affirmative action given the poverty rates in the black community, but poor students of any race should be given consideration in admissions as well. Anyone who comes from a poor background is at a disadvantage over a wealthier applicant, and our colleges should recognize that.

Of course, most colleges take extracurriculars, class rank, strength of the high school, and the difficulty of course load into account in addition to test scores, GPA, etc. A high school friend of mine got into an Ivy League school with an ACT in the thirties with a ton of extracurriculars; the valedictorian of his class was denied by that same school despite having a perfect ACT. As a side note, my friend was white, the valedictorian was Asian.

(06-22-2014 08:33 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

Quote:Sotomayor has said race-conscious programs in the 1970s that opened Ivy League schools to minorities were essential to her rise from the Bronx public housing projects to her admission to Princeton and Yale Law School, where she excelled.

Curiously - at least in the article - she says nothing about the law and whether it does or should validate race-conscious programs.

Note that both schools - Princeton and Yale - are private. They have in the past and will continue to use race-conscious criteria regardless of what the supreme court has done or will do.

Nice ogre nose, Sotomayor.

(06-23-2014 10:17 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:48 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:19 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:07 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 09:03 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I can't believe some of you don't want brown people to have a chance to go to school over someone deserving.

I get the sarcasm; however, if that is the case I wish schools would just say that and stop with all this "affirmative action" BS. Just put it in their policies and make it public that "x" amount of minorities will be given admission each year at the expense of some other more qualified individual.

But is that truly fair? Do you think Harvard wants the best or someone who is mediocre but they have to accept them because of AA?

If AA becomes the case for enrollment of college, there needs to be a clause put in that those let in for AA must attend 90% of all classes, carry a full load, and cannot withdraw and re-admit in the same academic year.

No, it obviously isn't fair but fairness is pretty one sided with regard to this topic.

I'm all for someone trying to better themselves. But in real life the playing field is somewhat level. What's going to be next? You have to pass so many of a race so they can graduate? We need to willing to help those who want to help themselves.

In their fight for equality, equality is the last thing they want.

(06-22-2014 08:33 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

Nothing is more infuriating than listening to someone defend racist affirmative action policies.

Quote:Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she supports affirmative action in higher education because she believes that alternatives based on geographic or economic status don’t work to ensure a diverse student body.

Sotomayor has said race-conscious programs in the 1970s that opened Ivy League schools to minorities were essential to her rise from the Bronx public housing projects to her admission to Princeton and Yale Law School, where she excelled.

Sotomayor, the court’s first Latina, was asked by George Stephanopoulos in a segment taped for ABC’s “This Week” about programs that might increase diversity in higher education that would be “less fractious” than the use of race.

She said that other programs have not proved as successful in diversifying student bodies and that universities should be able to consider race and not just academic measurements.

“What does qualifications mean in an academic setting?” she said. “A place like Princeton could fill their entire beginning freshman class with students who have scored perfectly on undergraduate metrics.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/j...ingtonpost

If people weren't racist to begin with, there would have never been any need for affirmative action.

Think about that for a moment.

(06-23-2014 11:52 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Too bad the rest of the world cannot be like a professional sports team. The cream rises to the top....the best and most deserving play.

Pro football has the Rooney rule. The Raiders had Jamarcus Russell.