vivianvolka

Really? I always thought AA was just about admissions and admissions is generally need blind, therefore has nothing to do with financial aid. I could be wrong though...

My understanding of AA goes something like this: Because of the long history people of color, women and etc. had of discrimination, it is nearly impossible for them to score the same grades and tests scores that white males do because white males have historically had privilege. So if admissions are based off of test scores alone, the campus would theoretically only be white (and now Asian) males. That is bad. Therefore, schools now look at your profile "holistically". It is as much of an advantage for you to be a minority as it is to have a high test score or a good class rank.

Niquii77

And if you're a minority and have high grades...DOUBLE WHAMMY!

SerenityJade

@niffler72, I'm not racist. I'm truthful. Affirmative action is racist.

I never said that non-whites get into schools solely because of their race.

Using race as a factor is inherently racist though. Because you're treating a person as if their race has an impact on who they are as a student.

I said nothing about money that didn't involve taxes. So I don't know where you're coming from on the funding thing.

And my family may be middle class but middle class doesn't mean well off. It means okay. Not enough to be able to pay for college though. And I'd like to not have more in loans than what my salary will be as a math teacher.

Blckmgc

There are a number of things wrong with what has been said

@niffler72
Affirmative action is not linked to financial aid. You cannot give more financial aid to a black or Hispanic student simply because of race; that would be illegal. Also, affirmative action is not designed so that colleges cannot discriminate based on race. It's so they can actively recruit minorities, which is why it's called AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.

You misrepresented what SerenityJade said, which is that of a white student and black student with identical, equal qualifications, the black student is more likely to be accepted. That's probably true for most colleges.

@vivianvolka
That's the old definition of affirmative action which was thrown out by Bakke v. University of California. The justification under which colleges are currently legally allowed to use affirmative action is to promote diversity, though that may change pending Fisher v. University of Texas

niffler72

@blckmgc QUOTAS based on race are illegal, using race as a determining factor technically isn't because it's the school's money and they can give it to whomever they want based on qualifications that they determine. at any rate, no it's not true that a black student would be accepted before a white student if they had an EQUAL chance. and if affirmative action isn't based on race then why is no one correcting the racist @serenityjade for claiming that it's racist?

Blckmgc

The Supreme Court has said that race can be used as ONE OF MANY factors, and we are talking about admissions here.

As for financial aid, colleges offer merit-based scholarships to different racial groups e.g. a scholarship that only black students can qualify for, but if a university were to differentiate based on race in a need-based financial aid policy, it would have been sued (successfully) years ago. When I said "financial aid" I was talking about need-based financial aid and not merit scholarships.

I also never said that affirmative action is not based on race. I said its purpose is not to prevent discrimination. That's what anti-discrimination laws do.

gravity95

It's very cultural; different cultures place different emphasis on education (given, economics are a factor, but some cultures might spend more of their income on education compared to other cultures).

gomdorri

I don't understand though... I am aware that different cultures have different emphasis on education, but not all people conform to the culture that they have been raised in. I find affirmative action unfair, because I think the environment is more key in shaping a person's knowledge than the culture that he/she comes from. I'm 100% Korean, but I don't (or didn't) come anywhere close to matching up with the stereotypes that most people attribute me with. I grew up in a city where a majority of the people don't care about school; In fact, half of the people in my grade circled in random bubbles on the PSAT without glancing at the test booklet because they don't see the importance in taking it. Last year, there was only one NMSF, which is very rare to be at my school. 75% of the students from our high school end up going to college in-state, and all of the colleges in our state are mediocre at best.

There are people who excel in school, but these people are usually the ones who grew up in a household with parents of good backgrounds, and they are given more money, motivation, and opportunities to do well (of course, this isn't always the case, but it is very true from most of the situations I've observed). My high school is predominantly Hispanic, but race doesn't necessarily mold the education we get at our school. There are people who speak both fluent English and Spanish, ace their classes, excel in their extracurriculars, and become state champions in their respective sports. On the other hand, there are also people who struggle to get 1600's on their SAT, bomb several of their classes, and have never even had the chance to go to state. The differences in achievement aren't due to ethnicity, they are due to disparities in either economic status, parenting, or individual motivation.

Personally, I find it uncomfortable to be grouped into a stereotype without being able to match up to it. My parents slept through high school getting occasional D's and F's and went to college and grad school, but when they moved to the US they started as dishwashers working seventeen hours a day in order to make a living. Not once have they given me a list of things I should do, and neither have they ever forced me to continue an activity that I disliked. My parents have always encouraged me to choose a career and lifestyle that fit my own interests. During elementary school, while my friends were reading Homer and Fyodor Dostoevsky, I was watching 6 hours of Pokemon and singing along to Hannah Montana. In 7th grade, I constantly scored D's on English tests, and wasn't a straight A student. Even when I got to high school, I managed to get straight A's, but I still got occasional F's on assignments; I was far from being considered the top student of my class. School wasn't my top priority, and every day after school, I would just turn on the computer, watch Korean dramas and anime, listen to music, sing, play computer games, mess around, and fall asleep. Until I discovered collegeconfidential, I had no idea that AP and SAT II tests existed. Before then, I only took AP and honors classes to be with my friends and avoid bullying and drugs. Once I decided on dream college, I finally started trying really hard in everything I did, and did manage to raise my average SAT practice score from a 1600 to a 2300+, but it took a lot of work. It is STILL taking a lot of work. My parents are supporting me as much as they can despite our current financial situation, but my achievements came about solely from my own desire. I'm not succeeding because my parents told me I need to succeed in life. I'm succeeding because I chose to do so and pushed myself to reach the dreams that I had previously given up on and deemed impossible to achieve.

Honestly, I don't like affirmative action. I can see the good motives behind it, but I think that overall, it is unfair and generalizing. I wish colleges looked at people holistically - truly holistically - instead of using race as a factor to judge a person. I don't know... maybe they'll change it in the future. I just think it's erroneous to group people into stereotypes according to race; maybe I'm just delusional.

Blckmgc

Exaggeration much? Nobody reads Dostoevsky in elementary school.

Rob1995

The thing a lot of people fail to realize is that colleges don't simply hand out admissions like candy to minorities simply because of their race. Most will look much more into their story than just their race.

Colleges can tell the difference between a spoiled Chinese kid with upper-middle class doctor parents and a poor Chinese girl who works to support her family who has to live on a day-to-day basis. Colleges can tell the difference between a rich half-Spanish boy who's lived in rich, white upper-class neighborhoods his entire and a first-generation Mexican boy who moved to a new country with a new language when he was 10 years old. Colleges can tell the difference between a wealthy white kid who's gotten everything handed to him on a silver platter with a rough, lower-middle class white kid who works on his father's farm in Nebraska.

Your race is only a small part of your identity. Colleges don't just look at your race, see black, and give you auto-entrance. They look at the whole story. Granted, sometimes colleges will give a decent boost to race - it would be naive to think otherwise - simply because diversity is a nice thing to have at a college (well, to most people, anyway) but the situation isn't as bad as a lot of people are portraying it. AA can be a little unfair at its worst, but it certainly isn't as bad as some people make it out to be ... and the person calling it racist - my god, get over yourself. You don't even know what racist means. =/

But like I said - diversity is just a nice thing to have on a campus - be it race, religion, gender, sexual orientations. Is it sexist for many public universities and LAC's to give slightly lower admission standards for men because there is an imbalance of women?

gomdorri

Exaggeration much? Nobody reads Dostoevsky in elementary school.
^ As far as you know. My friend was reading literature far beyond her level from a young age, and now her mastery of the English language is amazing. She has no problem with the critical reading or writing sections on the SAT because she is so well-read and exposed to everything. She started reading comprehensive novels starting from a young age because her parents drove her to and exposed her to classical literature at a very early age... I didn't read Dostoevsky until 7th grade. In this world, there are some very brilliant young people who have already accomplished great things. Look at history, and there is plenty of evidence just in that. You can't doubt a person's accomplishments just because you have never met someone like that in person...

gomdorri

I agree that it would be erroneous to assume that race is the only factor in the admissions process. Still, I think it is unfair to give people a boost in the admissions process because of their race.

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting this, but your post makes it sound like in general, poor people are hard workers and upper-middle class kids are snobs, which isn't true. I know plenty of people who come from low-income families who do everything in the world to help their parents out in tough financial situations. I also know several humble kids who come from rich families and appreciate what they have to the best of their ability. On the other hand of the spectrum, I also know kids who come from low-income families but scream if they can't have the latest iPhone, and I also know kids who show off their parents' success to everyone they know as if the world revolves around cash and bribery. And don't forget, there are also middle class citizens and small business owners who, on paper, seem like they are happy-go-lucky and financially, but in reality struggle to earn a living and stress out daily because of too much work combined with family problems, etc.

The difference between two people is not their race or economic status (although I admit, those may play a factor), but is the way the two people approach their situations and handle their problems. Character is much more important than physical appearance or material possessions.

No one can choose the race or social status they are born into. Everyone has the capability to change who he/she is as a person and make good judgments and decisions.

All people are entitled to their own opinions, and I personally think it is unfair to differentiate people based on race (as well as economic status, but less so because I can see how that could heavily impact a person's education) because it generalizes and puts people into stereotypes that aren't always true.

Blckmgc

I don't doubt there are a few brilliant individuals who can accomplish such things. You said "my friends [plural] were reading Homer and Fyodor Dostoevsky" in elementary school as if that were a common occurrence where you went to school.

Did you go to a school for the highly gifted or something? That could also explain why your 7th-grade English teachers were giving you D's if you really were reading Dostoevsky yourself by that age.

gomdorri

I pluralized friends because I had two friends who were reading Homer and Dostoevsky. Sorry for the confusion haha. It's not a common occurrence at my school, because the majority of the people in my school don't care about their education. There is only a small percentage of people who do care, but those people are diligent and there are also couple in our school who have accomplished great things (in my mind). Or maybe I am exaggerating their merit, since I tend to admire them a lot. o3o

I did read Dostoevsky when I was in 7th grade, but my problem then was that I never really absorbed everything and understood the purpose of the writing. That was my problem throughout middle school. The reason I got D's on tests all the time is that even if I reread the whole novel the night before the test, I would only remember the general idea of the storyline without knowing the details, (what I perceived as) unimportant characters, or purpose. (When I read, I usually forget small events and stuff and just think about the big picture-so I guess you could say I had a habit to summarize as I read). When it came to analysis, I was always struggling because I took things literally.

When I read Dostoevsky, I often skipped the words I didn't understand and simplified it to a way I could understand, which often involved ignoring the parts of a chapter that I wasn't able to interpret. In other words, I never really had trouble reading, I just had trouble reading comprehensively. I think we view the reading with different connotations, and if that's the case, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Blckmgc

We definitely weren't operating on the same definition of "read." I "read" Vernes and Dumas as a kid, but definitely not in the same way I'd read them now.