<p>“The reason for this is simple - Asians prioritize education and college admissions over all else.”</p>
<p>Maybe it’s simple, make it’s not. Everyday I work with 10-12 families, with students of many races (rarely if ever Asian, until college age! Then the Asian kids come!) around school performance, and I just don’t think “the reason is simple.”</p>
<p>But we don’t have to agree on that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It would for sure have a disastrous effect on URM enrollment, that part I agree. As, even in the lower SES, Asians have better academic and EC performance. So, I find it curious that you believe that this will help whites and not Asians (in that it has to help someone, if not Asians, the whites must benefit as URM share drops). </p>
<p>The UC experience proves otherwise. Once admissions were race blind, Asians gained share, even taking share away from whites.</p>
<p>So, essentially AA is not about ending SES inequality in the country. This is about ending racial inequality in the country. I wish people who support AA would be clear about this, that they do not have the interest of poor Americans from all races at heart. They are championing the cause of the URMs, even those from higher SES, and even if it discriminates against other minorities and people from other races in lower SES.</p>
<p>Not exactly a noble cause, if I may say so. Of course, there is another undercurrent - that removing AA will erode away the white share in addition to URM share. Diversity is all well and good, as long as we have majority whites. Asians understand this, which is why they want to remove AA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You have a better perspective of URMs than I do. Tell me the reason.</p>
<p>Xiggi, I would appreciate if you can answer one question. Why do you believe that URMs from middle to high SES deserve a thumb in the scale, while Asians from lower SES do not deserve the same?</p>
<p>'You have a better perspective of URMs than I do."</p>
<p>I do not specialize in URMs: I am a child psychiatrist. Most of my patients are white, Many are Mexican. Some are black. There are “trends” among cultures. For example, in my practice,white parents seem WAY more comfortable having their kids diagnosed and treated with medication, black parents do not want to “change” their children, and especially not emasculate their buys, and both Mexican parents are likely to come to appointments. But each child is a function of so many variables. </p>
<p>I don’t know" the" reason. If I did, it wouldn’t be interesting my more.The most compelling piece is, what a difference it makes when something comes easily to you. Not just on where you put your efforts, but in how other people see you, and the “opportunities” and consequences that become available to you. </p>
<p>Little things that turn into big things, and before you know it, its really hard to turn the ship.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, I fully agree. This is why Asian kids have an edge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought I have answered the question about why we need to preserve URM preferenes several times. And again, there is no reason to believe that adcoms do not evaluate Asians from lower SES in the appropriate context. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I dount you will find any evidence to support those claims. Standardized tests scores of Asians follow a bimodal distribution. Not sure which EC you are considering.</p>
<p>^^Hmm. </p>
<p>Well I can say that’s why I (emphasis on I,) had an edge. I feel so grateful ; How did I get so lucky? How came it all came together for me? (yeah, yeah, affirmative action). How can I use it to help other people? Not " I guess I’m better so I deserve better stuff." Not “hey! How come so and so is luckier than me”. But that’s just me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For one, I have never seen you give the reason. I have seen you state your preference for AA, but never the reason for the preference; it sort of just was. But I am not even asking that question. I am asking why there needs to be AA for middle-to-upper SES URMs. </p>
<p>Let’s leave the adcoms out of the discussion for a second. You trust them, I don’t, and let’s leave it at that. I am asking you a very direct question. What do you care about more, SES inequality or racial inequality? It is OK to say racial inequality. But if it is SES inequality, I just don’t see why you would put a thumb on the scale for mid-to-high SES URMs. Just claiming that 1) there is no such thumb, or 2) the adcoms take care of it doesn’t answer my question. Either you are in favor of a thumb on the scale for mid-to-high SES URMs, or you are not. If you are, fine, we will just have to agree to disagree. If you aren’t, then I don’t see why you are not OK with removing race and bringing in SES. This is a very important point, as I am failing to understand who exactly you support - all lower SES, or all URMs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If that is the case why do you think the URM share would drop like a rock if AA is replaced with SES based action? You are contradicting yourself my friend.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Forgive for being blunt. </p>
<p>It is utterly clear why Asians want to remove AA. Asians believe that removing AA would increase the number of seats they could claim because of a superior academic record. That is IT and only takes a few words. Fwiw, I do not blame Asians for taking that position. I do blame them for believing that the discrimination is so obvious that it does not need to be proven by evidence. </p>
<p>I give you credit for being clear as opposed to some who play games about their intention and disguise their argument behind ill-defined proposals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pardon my asking this, but how many Asians have you helped to share your good luck?</p>
<p>Twenty seven.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I recall, sm74 asked you first and your reply was that you weren’t going to answer because “it is what it is.”</p>
<p>Now, based on your more recent posts in the past few pages, your answer appears to be that without them, we “would eradicate most of what has been preserved or gained in the past 60 years” and "it is crucial for [so-called “URM"s] to see the pinnacle of our education as a NOT impossible dream.”</p>
<p>Have I understood you correctly? If so, could you give examples of things prserved or gained that would be eradicated if we abolished racial preferences? Do you have any evidence that without racial preferences, "URM"s would disappear and thereby lend the impression that the pinnacle of our education is an “impossible dream”?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I like blunt. Unless we are honest what’s the point of having a discussion? Similarly, I would appreciate if the supporters of AA were clear about their motivation. It is to secure a higher share of academic spots than pure performance would allow. For URMs but also for Whites. </p>
<p>Once we have settled this, then we can talk about fairness and such.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And how many URMs?</p>
<p>"As I recall, sm74 asked you first and your reply was that you weren’t going to answer because “it is what it is.” "</p>
<p>Then be happy I changed my mind and answered a different question from a different poster.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is really simple. If there is no discrimination anyway, make it illegal and see if the result changes. If you believe that there is no discrimination, you would also have to believe that the result won’t change, in which case you couldn’t care less about the passage of the law. Yet, the vehement protest against such a law gives away the core belief, that the result will change post such a law, and that there is discrimination today.</p>
<p>Please forgive me for being blunt xiggi, but that’s exactly how you have debated so far. Frankly, it is quite amusing when on one hand someone argues for a thumb on the scale based on race, and on the other claims that there is no racial discrimination.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good, now that we have been blunt, we can stop arguing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Amusing as it might appear to you, a system of preferences for some does not automatically means there is discrimination against the remaining groups. </p>
<p>To be blunt again, Asians who were rejected were not rejected because their spot were given to undeserving candidates. They were rejected for the same reasons as all the other candidates from all races were, and that reason is that the other candidates responded better to the needs of the adcoms to form the very best and most equitable class. </p>
<p>It is obvious that I will never convince you to accept that argument, and the good news, is that it is not my place nor ambition to convince you. It seems that both of us would prefer a different outcome in the final tallies of admissions at the most prestigious schools. </p>
<p>For what is worth, this is the world of admissions. Very few people seem content about the final outcomes, and this for a variety of reasons. </p>
<p>I really wish you all the best with your kid applications, and hope that he will get his just desserts.</p>
<p>Ok, I’m kidding. I like to think when I help one family, I help a village. The vast majority of my patients we white.</p>
<p>When I was in middle school, I tutored a Chinese girl in math (!!!), and she taught me Chinese letters. She told her parents that I stole her dads watch, and the police came and questioned me. Iwas eleven. I heard eventually he parents sent leer back (she was adopted).</p>
<p>I certainly have shared my " luck" socially, with my kids friends. They hang out here, I drive them around, I sponsor their teams. But not many in this community see Psychiatrists. I have seen about 10 Korean kids, maybe the same number of Filipino and East Indian kids. I saw a Chinese girl a few times, leer school was really worried about her, but he mom pulled her from treatment and said nothing was wrong.</p>
<p>Why do you ask? Do you have a theory about this?</p>