Facts about different ethnicities !!!

[Newjack88]

<p>

It’s really not that difficult to understand. You are asserting that the better the school, the higher its graduation rate. Duke has a slightly higher graduation rate than Chicago. Thus, by your logic, it’s a better school. The only reason I point out this absurd example is for comparison with top publics; they have comparable graduation rates.

Ok… now you seem like you just want to argue for the sake of arguing. I am pretty sure that this is a fact. No, I am not asserting that Duke is better than Chicago because it has a slightly higher graduation rate. Since Duke and Chicago are both schools of similar quality you can not apply this trend to them. Long story short, you chose a poor example to evaluate this trend. The trend only applies to schools with a large difference in the perceived quality. For example, comparing a junior college to an ivy or pretty much any other college of higher quality.</p>

<p>

That’s precisely what I’m saying. What is it that’s unclear? I’m saying a diverse class should have it in culture and socioeconomics. That’s what should be factored into admissions. Ethnicity is a proxy. Why in the world would you want the former and can get it directly, but seek the latter? Hmm, oh right – for PR.

First, you can keep on saying it’s a PR tactic as many times as you want but that does not make you right. You could at least try back up your claims.</p>

<p>Second, refer to the flow chart I made in my earlier post and it will make sense why they would use the proxy of ethnicity.</p>

<p>Third, culture and ethnicity are VERY interrelated so, according to you, we agree that ethnicity should be considered. So I guess you support AA after all. : )</p>

<p>Fourth, colleges look at your school’s profile and can infer the applicant’s socio-economic background. For example if you go to a $10, 000 a year private school or a public school in a wealthy zip code area that has 15 AP/IB classes offered, admissions officers would be able to infer that the applicant is pretty well of. Likewise, if you go to a public school in a low-income zip code that offers no AP classes, colleges will infer that you are more than likely economically disadvantaged.</p>

<p>

Plenty of people who are URMs are not discriminated against.

Wow… ok, no! I think am more qualified to speak about this matter than you are since that statements indicates that you are either ignorant about this topic or incredibly naïve.</p>

<p>

Prime example: a good friend of mine, a Mexican, was president of ASB in high school; he was a middle-class student, very popular, well-liked, and suffered no discrimination. (And yes, this is anecdotal evidence, but one which provides an example that makes your all-inclusive generalization null.)

Prime example!? Horrible example! ROFL! You clearly do not understand what discrimination is! </p>

<p>

It makes mixing more difficult, but certainly doesn’t prevent.

That is a pretty bad argument. I said that cliques “prevent students from associating with whomever they wish.” You are pretty much saying the same thing as me.</p>

<p>

I don’t think it’s “severely.” I would say that equality has been promoted much too strong for it to be considered “severely” (though I am not saying that we have perfect equality – far from it). You, however, disagree. To see which is more accurate, we would have to examine the efficacy of equality laws and such – how equal people are (i.e. NOT held back by stereotypes) in their lives.

Ok so you have no idea what you are talking about. Stereotypes have absolutely nothing to do with the law; they have to do with society. What I was saying is that many URMs are discouraged by society to be smart due to negative stereotypes regarding their intelligence. One example of this sort of stereotype is the stereotype that “URMs only get into top colleges as a result of AA.”</p>