(01-14-2021 03:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 12:24 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:28 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 10:04 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 09:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  If you type 'affirmative action' into Google, you get this as the definition:\

(in the context of the allocation of resources or employment) the practice or policy of favoring individuals belonging to groups known to have been discriminated against previously.

How is 'favoring individuals' in ANY context a level playing field?

I get and support the purpose of affirmative action. I get and support the idea of a level playing field. Instead of focusing on the inputs to a level playing field... i.e. equal educational opportunities etc etc, we instead seem to focus almost solely on the idea that seperate can somehow be made equal... and on equal outcomes despite the CONTINUED variance in inputs, 50 years later.

As others have noted, if multi-millionaire Beyonce wants to open a resource for the needy in Houston (which is admirable) she gets (among other things) tax benefits for doing so that 'social justice warrior' who earns <100k/yr Tom Smith does not... SOLELY because she is black and he is white. That is not the intention of affirmative action policies.... but that is the result and I've never ONCE heard anyone from the left (in any position to mean anything about it) seek to address that. Not once.

As I implied with the admissions answer... the correct way to do it is to evaluate people based on the whole of themselves... and that opportunities or lack thereof can greatly impact outcomes... thus someone who overcomes obstacles to do a 'good' job at something is often a much better choice than someone who has nothing to overcome and does slightly better. Yes, those are subjective measures... but I'm being asked to sum up a policy that encompasses potentially millions of variables. If someone wanted to, many formulas could be created to make it more objective.

I agree with your idea of a fair admission process. That said... when the schools get 10s of thousands of applications there is no way that the admissions committees will really get to "know" every applicant. Therefore there is an initial culling of applicants based on numbers alone.

I still haven't heard from OO about his vision of college campuses with nothing but white and Asian people.

Says the guy who ignores my questions for days, perhaps weeks, then pleads busy at work or off camping. Contrary to the belief of FBO and it seems, you, being retired does not mean "has no life". I was gone last night from about 5 to about 11(social engagement), spent a couple of minutes at the computer before going to bed, up early this morning to go to the hospital (nonemergency), on the way back stopped at the Title company to sign some documents on a real estate deal, leaving again in about an hour to go back to the hospital, will stop by the Title company again to deliver signed documents. I have driven about 200 miles in the last 18 hours, with about 75 more planned.

Yeah... sometimes I get too busy at work to post and sometimes I take my kids camping. I wasn't freaking out about your non-answer... but you continued to post on the topic at hand but hadn't addressed the question. I'm not sure you still have. You would rather have all white/Asian kids at elite colleges than continue the current system? I mean... perhaps there is a happy medium but I haven't seen a reasonable proposal out there that gets us there.

If the question is the one in bold, I have said you are making an unwarranted assumption, and now are asking me to defend something I never said. Additionally, I think your assumption is racist if you think blacks cannot compete academically on a level field.

I didn't say that you said that you'd rather only have white/Asian students at elite institutions... I said that your approach to admissions would likely result in that situation. I was wondering if that result was preferable to you than the current situation where there is diversity on campuses but you may find the admissions process less fair.

As to the bolded... of course I think they can compete. Why would I be pushing for their inclusion at elite institutions if I didn't? Thank you for saying it would be racist to not believe so. Very enlightened of you.

Quote:

Quote:I got tired of waiting for your responses when they took multiple days, now you are tired of waiting multiple hours. Same thing, sure.

Actually... I didn't care about waiting but I was wondering if you missed the question because you had continued to post about this without answering it. Again... it wasn't a big deal.

I didn’t realize your unwarranted assumptions and efforts to change the discussion were questions

Did you notice the question mark?

Quote:

Quote:To the question:

I don't have a vision of college campuses with nothing but white and Asian people. I guess you made that up. If Trump said it, it would be called a baseless lie by that bastion of journalistic integrity, WashPo. . I will just call it an unwarranted assumption. I have a vision of college campuses filled with people who earned their way there. I have a vision of a student body selected on factors other than skin color, sex, or ethnic heritage. If that ends up being more this way than that way, so be it. If it ends up 85%or more black, fine with me. In fact, isn't that the case in HBCUs? (real question - I want an answer).

Unless you are going 100% by standardized test scores I'm not sure how you ensure the admissions process is "fair".

It’s not fair now. I think trained people making considered judgements can produce better results than racial prejudice.

Wasn't the WHOLE point of affirmative action was that there were not enough students of color at these institutions? What was going on with these considered judgements when AA was decided to be necessary?

Quote:

Quote:Of course, going back in history, Rice at the time I entered was all white. Yet somehow the admissions staff winnowed through about 10K applications to admit 425 freshmen. Still a wonder to me that I made the cut. I am sure that no school, including Rice, just goes down the ranked scores to the cutoff. That would mean Admissions could be run by one person, a part time secretary with a laptop. So, IMO, another unwarranted assumption. Maybe you could try making your case without using unwarranted assumptions.

You don't think that schools cut out a ton of applicants before they really get into the nitty-gritty of each individual? I disagree.

I didn’t say that. Where did that come from? Like any other job that has people winnowing a large pool into a small one, like publishing or hiring, people make judgements as to what they are looking for. I remember one report on Rice Admissions that said there were 5 applicants with perfect SATs, and two were accepted. Why did the other three fail? Part of the judgement process.

Quote:I may be gone for a while this afternoon, perhaps even later, but rest assured, I will not ignore your questions. I will get to them sooner or later. If I have missed some, feel free to repeat them.

I won't lose any sleep either way.

I hope not. Presumably you are work, and very, very busy.