tokenadult

Well, okay, it is consistent with what I said earlier to suppose that a college applicant looking for a diverse environment will look for a college that has diversity among its students. But that would be a self-sustaining form of student preference, if it is as commonplace as it is among the students I know. A college wouldn't have to have anything in the admission file indicating what ethnic group, say, a student comes from, if it can count on getting applications from every which kind of students, and if it knows that many of those students are happy to be with students from differing backgrounds.

Yes, we live in a neighborhood that is "integrated" in the usually meant ethnic sense. That is our consistent preference. I hear that there are still a lot of young people in the United States who grow up without neighbors of different ethnic heritage--which is their loss. If everyone from every which neighborhood is willing to apply to colleges far away of national reputation, and if those colleges admit young people with strong academic potential and good "roommate qualities," then I think students attending those colleges will not find the college tipping into representation of only one sex, or of only one or two large ethnic groups. Rather, the college will be a continuation of the situation my family already enjoys, living among people of varied background, and a new environment for young people who didn't grow up in such a neighborhood.

fabrizio

I also reject this assumption. It has never made sense to me why the people who argue in favor of a race-based admission process are the same ones who claim that "diverse" students are as qualified as non-"diverse" sudents. Wouldn't that make race-based admissions pointless since "diverse" students are already as qualified? I think it does, but obviously others don't see it that way.

Why does everything have to "closely match" the general population? Isn't that a quota? Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, quotas are illegal because of Bakke. But, apparently, "closely matched populations" aren't illegal. Interesting indeed.

Shrinkrap

I hesitate to join in here but I can't help but saying how pleased I am that there has been a significant increase in the applicant pool of African american /URM applicants to UC Santa Barbara and UC Davis. I think my D could go a lot of places but at this point a school with a better than 3 percent mix of African Americans , especially at that price and modicum of rigor will make a better fit. If UC Santa Barbara becomes the "place to be" for kids looking for more "diversity" in the UC sytem, good on them...

Bay

A race-blind admissions process can result in a racially-diverse student population only if 17-year-olds are somehow able to evenly distribute their applications and acceptances across all universities in a racially diverse manner. Otherwise, the admissions office must help them do it.

vossron

Private colleges do not (all) admit the most qualified (whatever that means); they admit those they want the most. Race is one factor they use, along with many others. They do not insure that admitted classes closely match the general population; it is, at best, a goal, what we would have if we had a truly color-blind society.

Tyler09

A couple side notes.

The difference between wanting well represented populations and a quota is that a quota requires a hard number and a consequence for not reaching that number. In which case adcoms would count up minority students and if they didn't hit that number they would admit more minorities until they did. If this was the case evidence would show in a practically identical number of minorities every year. (which is not the case as it fluctuates)

Second, the intent of state school AA programs, Before schools came to recognize the value of diversity in a student body, was a kind of forced integration/reconstruction. It ultimately forced schools to look in areas they wouldn't look before to find strong minority students, or face consequences.

What we are seeing now is that so many schools have become so competitive and are competing for the minority students, that the pool of highly competitive minorities is running out.

There are two paths that can be taken at this point. People revolt and seek to overturn AA. Or the state education systems are forced to overhaul themselves in order to produce more competitive minority students.

In a sense, the fact that the UC system is one of the only state systems with race blind admissions is in the long run good for the state, as long as all private universities are allowed to keep there programs. Because as we are seeing, the top minority students who are qualified to attend UCLA and UCB are turning those schools down because of the lack of diversity and scholarships they can offer targeted to them to schools like Stanford and the like. Ultimately this will result in the system pressuring the state to improve education in minority concentrated areas, which tend to have the poorest schools.

So while i don't agree with abolishing AA on principle, if it happens very very slowly (like one state every 5 years) and only in public universities, it could have the positive effect that AA intends to accomplish, which is forcing state school systems to improve public education and produce stronger minority students.

I also think that federal funding linked to meeting minority performance requirements would help speed up that change, but the supreme court ruled "quotas" unconstitutional, even though they aren't when it comes to education.

Though, the thing i dislike is when people who oppose AA, i can see what grounds they would oppose it on (equal vs. fair), fail to provide an alternative solution to the problem and also disagree that that alternative should be set up before AA is taken away (socioeconomic AA is not a solution, do some research).

StitchInTime

vossron:

When will "we get there"? It was misinformation that got our society 'here'. Couldn't we use the antidote (information) to get us 'there'? A case can be made (is being made) that "getting there" will be accelerated by declining to "self-identify":

That very act of not self-identifying (which tokenadult documents is as high as 15% at some schools) is a message from future stakeholders. Their message..."We want to be part of an institution that doesn't look us through a 'prisim' that segments and classifies." Furthermore, by declining to self-indentify they are discarding the 'prisim' and in effect "getting there" faster than the institution can with all its 'good' intentions.

The recommendation, to applicants/students reading this thread, that they decline to self-indentify has more merit than the bureaucratic classification mechanism suggested by the Census Bureau. It will bring us all closer to the 'race inconscious' society that the 'The Fastest-Growing Ethnic Category at Great Colleges' seeks.

An appeal to all students/applicants:

Decline to self-identify and know that you contributed to Dr. King's dream of being judged by the content of your character, rather than the color of your skin.

Shrinkrap

Oooh! Playing the "Dr. King's Dream" Card....

fabrizio

Tyler,

Let’s use your description of the difference. A quota uses a hard number. A “well-represented” population does not use a hard number but rather is proportional to the general population. Proportional to what? A hard number. That this number may fluctuate annually does not change that for a given time point, it is fixed.

You mentioned California as an example of the good that happens when racial preferences are abolished. Educational institutions are forced to actually do work to solve problems as opposed to magically engineering classes that “closely match” the general population.

fabrizio

It's the ace of spades, as it should be.

Bay

Unfortunately, it is more likely 17 and 18 year old caucasians and Asians thinking they'll have a better shot at getting in if they don't self-identify. A purely selfish, rather than altruistic motive.

Shrinkrap

"It's the ace of spades, as it should be..."

Can I act like I know what he'd think too? Naw. I could never try that.

LaxFan987

Affirmative Action is racist and unjust. I checked Caucasian on most of my applications for fear that if I checked "unknown" I would be grouped with the Asians.

tokenadult

What's your definition of "racially diverse" here? I disagree with the statement as you have made it, but show me your work and maybe I'll change my mind.

tokenadult

What is the evidence for this? It's very troubling to be in a discussion about an important public policy issue when facts are assumed rather than demonstrated.