are colleges racist?

woeishe · June 21, 2011, 9:09pm

But there aren’t negative effects from being Asian?

bovertine · June 21, 2011, 9:09pm

Aww come on. You know he doesn’t really believe that. Nobody does. He’s only saying that because he’s got a set of PC marching orders to follow.

bovertine · June 21, 2011, 9:11pm

Read the thread, and point out one person who has changed their mind in a significant way and I’ll admit I am wrong. Arguing about this on here is not going to change anything.

And no need to curse.

Is this more acceptable to you (changes emphasized) -

It’s worded slightly differently, but means the same thing. And I believe it to be true.

sewhappy · June 21, 2011, 9:12pm

Bovertine,

If i understood your post correctly you are accusing me of questioning the use of race in admissions because I’m worried my second kid won’t make it into a top school. Is that your contention?

Hmmm. So you’re basically insulting my daughter and me because I don’t agree with you on this thread.

Nice. Classy. You’re going to convert a lot of people to your side with that, Bovertine.

If I were on your “side” in this debate I’d ask you to take a time out.

Hunt · June 21, 2011, 9:17pm

bovertine was being sarcastic. He (she?) was responding to posts claiming that Karabel was lying about his own opinion. So bovertine simply took the liberty of assuming that some of you were lying about your own opinions.

And I have to point out that several posters here are asserting, or at least assuming, that college admissions offices are lying about their procedures and policies.

performersmom · June 21, 2011, 9:18pm

Hunt,
I read your link. Thanks for finding and sharing it.
Personally, in my version of the world, I do not see discrimination based on race, pure and simple. I see many other things that hurt URM’s.
There is obviously a hard-wired tendency for humans to categorize, and to define things as different or the same (tall, red-head, easy to anger, from a different neighborhood, a member of a certain club or gang, a doctor, wealthy, a home-renter, fashionably dressed, hip, watches indie movies, blah blah blah…) As humans, we individually will have learned preferences for some things and not others. As a society, we are taught to see groupings, and exactly how to be politically correct.
I am suggesting that we try to do that with different categories at the institutional level.

As for AA for women in the 70’s, it does not always work. There are some fields that still have relatively few women, especially in power positions, for whatever reason. Did AA make the difference for women, or did they just move in and forward, and use birth control, home-efficiency technology, and their education???

Bay · June 21, 2011, 9:18pm

What I am saying is what I said. Americans want URMs (and women) in the mix at the highest levels. In the end, no one cares how you got where you are. They just want you to do what you are expected or promised to do. (This aligns with the theory that it doesn’t matter where smart kids go to college).

performersmom · June 21, 2011, 9:25pm

“(This aligns with the theory that it doesn’t matter where smart kids go to college).”

Then why boost ANYone’s chances at getting into a selective school???

bovertine · June 21, 2011, 9:25pm

If you would read my later post, you would see that I wrote I absolutely do not believe that. That would be a stupid thing to believe or allege since I don’t know you, or anybody else on here, and I certainly don’t know anybody’s child. And I give people the benefit of the doubt that they actually think about issues and post their real opinions without duress or bias, although I also believe (maybe controversially) that personal circumstances are a valid consideration.

But in this case I used it to illustrate a point about people making nasty accusations about others without any evidence. It’s not a particularly attractive thing to do, IMO. EVen when I do it.

And I don’t really expect to convert anyone to my side. I don’t really have a side.

texaspg · June 21, 2011, 9:35pm

Bay - The boardrooms of America suck for the lack of diversity.

Bay · June 21, 2011, 9:35pm

Please don’t make me have to address why it was important that Obama went to Harvard. Thanks.

Bay · June 21, 2011, 9:36pm

I agree.

[10 char]

performersmom · June 21, 2011, 9:41pm

Hunt,
I f you meant me, AdComms “lying” is too strong a word. I said not “being open”. I could now add “not being self-aware or aware of the impact of their policies.” Maybe I think that as a group they suffer from group-think, which can be an impediment to tough analysis and critical thinking, needed for beneficial change. But lack of openness/awareness is NOT the same as lying.
Also, you seem to be saying, “Well the world is still racist, so the AdComms need to keep using racial profiles/be racist to counter-act it.” I think that is patently reinforcing the problem. Just my opinion.

Bay,
You seem to be saying that without URM-aware admissions, URM’s would not be there/admitted. I AM MORE OPTIMISTIC. I am thinking that ALL applicants’ unique qualities do come though holistically AND that socio-economically disadvantaged candidates of all sorts WILL get a boost if the boxes change to income and asset categories with regional indices. AdComms are looking for diversity- URM’s provide that in and of themselves without being labelled as URM.

performersmom · June 21, 2011, 9:44pm

My impression is that Obama did not “need” a boost. Also, does anyone “need” to go to Columbia and Harvard in order to be elected President???

texaspg · June 21, 2011, 9:49pm

I don’t see adcoms have the power to set policy. They are the implementers of policy that would have come down from above. The thing that scares me most is how young they all are, being hired right out of college to make decisions about kids’ futures who are only 4 -8 years younger than them.

fireandrain · June 21, 2011, 10:30pm

Wow, I go away for a few days and nothing has changed. First, my response to Fabrizio’s response to me some millions of pages ago.

It’s what I see repeated by Asians on numerous threads on CC, over and over and over again.

No comment, don’t know who Kang or Wu are or what they say.

I see people as individuals AND as members of a group. Both. I don’t understand why one cannot be an individual AND a member of a group. I am defined both by who I am and by what and who I identify with. I can be an individual as well as a Baptist and a Giants fan and a Trekkie and a Deadhead and Hispanic.

I disagree. We just have to agree that we disagree.

More recently, Hunt wrote:

I agree with this. But I also want to say that there are positive aspects of identifying with people of your race. Yes, we need to respect the individual, but there are cultural and social and personal benefits to being part of a group – including a racial group. Should Native Americans abandon their pride in their culture and heritage? Should Asians forget about their culture and heritage, too? (I think Amy Tan’s books addresses this question.) Diversity is not only about addressing past wrongs. It’s about celebrating differences in cultures and learning from them.

performersmom · June 21, 2011, 10:54pm

I just popped onto the students’ latest thread on this issue and found an interesting link to an article in McLean.ca about the Asian admissions situation.
It is interesting to see how the Canadian unis’ more meritocratic admissions techniques combine with their selective immigration system.
My take is that there is a problem with racial mixing vs affiliation there and that is the focus of the issue for them.
It seems that, if the journalist is correct, the Canadians are more open about some things. It is interesting to see the writers’ interpretation of what the US admissions situation is on this issue.
Here is a quote, but I recommend you all read the entire article for this journalistic interpretation of the Canadian situation.

“In 2006, at its annual meeting, the National Association for College Admission Counseling explored the issue in an expert panel discussion called “Too Asian?” One panellist, Rachel Cederberg—an Asian-American then working as an admissions official at Colorado College—described fellow admissions officers complaining of “yet another Asian student who wants to major in math and science and who plays the violin.” A Boston Globe article early this year asked, “Do colleges redline Asian-Americans?” and concluded there’s likely an “Asian ceiling” at elite U.S. universities. After California passed Proposition 209 in 1996 forbidding affirmative action in the state’s public dealings, Asians soared to 40 per cent of the population at public universities, even though they make up just 13 per cent of state residents. And U.S. studies suggest Ivy League schools have taken the issue of Asian academic prowess so seriously that they’ve operated with secret quotas for decades to maintain their WASP credentials.”

I will post the link to the whole article in my next post for those who care to see how this whole article reads.

performersmom · June 21, 2011, 10:59pm

Here it is:
The enrollment controversy* - Canada - Macleans.ca.

Shrinkrap · June 21, 2011, 11:02pm

“I agree with Fabrizio that wealthy, educationally privileged URM’s should not receive the boost- sorry if this offends anyone.)”

Not getting a boost doesn’t offend me. Saying race doesn’t matter, and that Fab and I have the same interests because I am “wealthy” offends me. OTOH, things look so hopeless for young black men, the whole AA discussion usually just fades into the background when I am not wasting/spending time here.

''That is a sign of progress and racial inter-marriage and cultural inter-mixing."

As long as you leave black woman out of the equation.

But these things are for a different forum, and since race doesn’t matter anymore, I expect to see you all there!

"You seem to be saying that without URM-aware admissions, URM’s would not be there/admitted. "

Admitted, maybe; but would “we” go?

mathmom · June 21, 2011, 11:07pm

That wasn’t our experience at all. Speaking as the Mom of a kid who got an 800 on the PSAT writing where there was no essay. My son had 770M/800CR and got 690 on the writing twice despite writing dozens of essays between the two tests. The only reason he bothered was that Harvey Mudd at the time had a scholarship that required 700+ on every section. I really don’t think that colleges care much about the writing score and if it’s over 700 it’s fine, especially if there is evidence elsewhere that the kid can write. (My son had a 5 on APUSH and a decent though not very exciting essay.) If it’s going to nag at the kid that he should have tried to increase the writing score fine, but I don’t think any college is going to care. It’s a good enough score and it is far more important that the soft parts of the application are appealing.

Mind you I don’t think there’s anything wrong with taking the SAT twice. Just keep in mind scores may go down instead of up, or both. A friend of mine in high school got 750/750 and was cross that my school bullied her into taking it again, she got 790/710 the second time. Not sure they superscored in those days, but I doubt it hurt her. (BTW she got rejected from Yale even though she was a legacy and they were taking huge numbers of young women from our school back then - just after it had gone coed.)

are colleges racist?

CONNECT WITH US