<p>Here is what I wrote in response to a post to AbsweetMarie. Maybe you will benefit by reading it:</p>
<p>"
You are completely missing the point. I am not inviting you to do calculations. What I am saying is that probabilistic calculations explain the AA Stigma.</p>
<p>You somewhat are trying to say that explaining a phenomenon is offensive. Perhaps even that I am trying to offend people intentionally (actually, I did tried to get back at Pizza after being labeled many things by her, but I digress…).</p>
<p>What I am trying to do is to show that altough some public policies have noble results, they may also have unintended consequences. Who would think that this is offensive?</p>
<p>If a Politica Scientist/Economist/Sociologiist studies poverty and shows some facts that drive poverty. Some consequences of poverty. Some reasons the explain when efforts to alliviate poverty are likely to work or not. When some people are likely to experience social mobility and when they are not, is this offensive to poor people? If someone finds that some public policy is likely to diminish social mobility, would you like to know about it? Or would you prefer to just wish that this were not the case? </p>
<p>If an MD-PHD studies intervention X for someone who may have some health condition, and shows that such an intervention improve health in some dimensions, but has side effects in other dimensions, is this offensive to someone? Do you prefer to only be informed about the positive effects of a medicine, or would you prefer to read the side-effects as well?
"</p>
<p>And to make it absolutely clear, I am not condoning stigmatization. The same way that I do not want to condone poverty or make people poor. But I think it is worthwhile to understand why AA may help perpetuate stigmatization.</p>
<p>@Pizzagirl: it’s a cultural thing for some, I think. And they DO push their children that way. How many Asians do you seen in theater or anthropology or Russian literature classes? This is why I think people like the OP are misguided. They think STEM is superior to all other academic pursuits, and they base every single evaluation of students on how they perform along a narrow range of criteria that favor those who excel at the “M,” especially.</p>
<p>Asian parents push their kids into STEM disciplines, because statistically that is where their kids have a solid likelihood of having a good standard of living.</p>
<p>Mega movie stars may earn a helluva lot more than doctors, but the probability of getting to that level is very, very remote for theatre majors.</p>
<p>Things have apparently changed. My son at Brown reports that 50% of the students in his two math classes and 30% of the students in his physics class are female. His CS class is also 50% female. The math and physics classes are all advanced classes, either with multiple prerequisites or having an easier alternative version available, so one might assume the students enrolled in these classes are planning to major or minor in those subjects.</p>
That is a start. It is a better argument than outright denying that stigmatization may occur as a function of AA.
The argument can be improved by stating that while AA produces better outcomes for some URM students, it produces worse outcomes for other URM students.</p>
<p>Also, I agree with GMAT+7. The current debate at SCOTUS leve is not whether AA helps URM students, but whether it helps all students enough to justify its cost (this is the ‘diversity’ argument).</p>
<p>"it’s a cultural thing for some, I think. And they DO push their children that way. How many Asians do you seen in theater or anthropology or Russian literature classes? This is why I think people like the OP are misguided. "</p>
<p>You do not have to agree with other people’s views, just as they do not have to agree with yours. But I do not see the needs for the underlying tone against Asian culture in your post.</p>
<p>BTW, I have Asian colleagues and their children who have pursued degrees, all the way to PhDs, in anthropology, french, linguistics, comparative literature, etc. </p>
<p>GMT is just one person, and we do not even know if she/he is Asian. </p>
<p>From my own experience, stereotyping of any kind is untrue and unhealthy. I have met Asians of many different types, just like every other racial/ethnic group.</p>
<p>This seems odd. Algebra 1 in 6th grade is three grade levels ahead of normal. So she must be quite exceptional (by US standards, anyway) in math. That there are enough observations of boys taking Algebra 1 in 6th grade implies a rather exceptional group of students at the school. (When I was in high school, only one student every few years started Algebra 1 as early as 7th grade; such a student was considered the top student in math.)</p>
<p>Even if she started Algebra 1 in 7th grade, she should be on track to complete calculus BC in 11th grade (two grade levels ahead of normal) without needing summer classes. And if she waited until 8th grade to start Algebra 1, she would complete calculus BC in 12th grade (one grade level ahead of normal) without needing summer classes.</p>
<p>“Asian parents push their kids into STEM disciplines, because statistically that is where their kids have a solid likelihood of having a good standard of living.”</p>
<p>Yes, understood. That doesn’t imply that blacks “should” be pushed into STEM too. Two wrongs and all.</p>
<p>Don’t be fooled. Not one person who is “concerned” for your poor future stigmatization would hesitate a nano second to take ANY advantage they could. Witness: Kumon, test prep, private coaches, private schools, etc…</p>
<p>Do you see the battle for an edge? take your edge and move on, and rest assured they would, too.</p>
<p>For the rest of us out here in the real world? We’re just cheering you on.</p>
<p>I don’t support legacy admissions as much as I do the freedom of a college to accept them. There’s more to be gained than lost from it. It’s not as if the boost is usually huge.</p>