(05-07-2021 10:11 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(05-07-2021 09:55 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(05-07-2021 09:46 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(05-07-2021 09:28 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-07-2021 09:21 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Uhhh, my "cornucopia of examples" fit exactly into your last comment. So you do find them "-ist." I disagree with your perspective there and think that it waters down what those "-ist" terms denote.

It's just a disagreement on perspectives, yet by God, do you want to make that personal and us the ad homs you say greatly dislike.

Fine lets look at your examples.

"Support groups" for women. ---- running a 'support group' for anyone isnt anywhere near on the par as specific and targeted set asides. Nor are support groups exclusionary to the extent that government set-asides based on race are. Not <pick your favorite race, skin color> --- go to the back of the line, bucko. Not even close to an -ist situation.

Disabled vets -- as noted, seems to be a fair contract ideal. You lose a limb for your country, there is back end insurance. You seem to miss that perspective, that is of the government service aspect of vets.

'hoblbedy gobbledy something or other about rural area' --- that supposed named issues is so broad as to be meaningless.

Here is one spot on, since it looks like I will have to do your work for you for on-point examples:

Government work set asides for women simply because they are 'people of birthing' -- yep, that is definitely sexist. In the definition of the term.

Tanq...

OO told us which one he would prefer. How about you?

1) Rice in it's current iteration of student composition WRT race and class. Scholarship athletes notwithstanding.

2) Rice with nearly 100% well-off white and Asian kids (kids with the best scores/extracurriculars/AP classes who applied).

Not exactly an exhaustive list of choices, but...

Please note the assumptions on which #2 is based. You seem to think all the black kids we admit now come from impoverished inner city schools. I wonder if any at all do. I would guess they nearly all come from the same suburban schools as the white and Asian (and other) kids do.

Yes... that's why I brought class into it. BIPOC kids from wealthy families from high-performing high schools would be the exception. I don't know what the numbers would look like when you compare numbers of those kids with the same scores of white/Asian kids but I'm pretty sure you would be DRAMATICALLY changing the composition of elite schools when utilizing your plan.

Not sure I understand - are you saying most of our minorities come from inner city schools? Do you have any references for that?

Quote:My assumption is that #2 would result in higher average scores for incoming freshmen, and that in turn would result in better outcomes for future seniors and grads.

Better outcomes how? Are there studies that correlate SAT scores with "better outcomes"? What outcomes? Future salaries of your well-off white and Asian alums?

In every endeavor, in every way, starting with better prepared people leads to better results. It is the opposite of GIGO. Are there studies that say starting with lesser scores lead to better outcomes? maybe that is why UH is the academic leader in Houston.

Quote:If your mission is to to turn out the most accomplished scholars, it makes sense to start with the best high school seniors, does it not?

If that's your mission but even then I'm not sure it does. One of my closest friends at Rice likely was helped with his admission by affirmative action. He's one of the smartest people that I know and is, by any measure, a success.

Was he from an inner city HS? I'll bet his HS was better than mine.

I'll take the Hispanic kid with a 1310 SAT from the poor high-school that doesn't have that many extra-curriculars (he helps in his parents restaurant after school) over the Kinkaid kid with a 1430 that spent 200 hours preparing for the SAT with a $200/hour tutor. You might say that makes me racist.