<p>Consider these statistics regarding SAT scores ( taken on the old 1600-point scale ). Yes, SAT scores are not the only part of a college application; however, they do strongly correlate with every other statistical qualities portrayed on the application. These dedicate the degree and magnitude to which scores correspond to the mean score of an AA-practicing institution, with a negative sign dedicating scores below the mean and vice versa.</p>
<p>Harvard University 10.0% / 16.7% / + 67.0%
MIT 15.9% / 31.6% / + 98.7%
Brown 16.6% / 26.3% / + 58.4%
Penn 21.2% / 30.1% / + 42.0%
Georgetown 22.0% / 30.7% / + 39.5% </p>
<p>In essence, the most troubling aspect of affirmative action is that blacks, despite an average deficit of 345 SAT points below the average applicant, are still admitted at nearly twice the rate. This is discrimination, not “diversifying talents.”</p>
<p>SAT scores are not one’s only opportunity for success. But the paradox associated with affirmative action is that supporting it is akin to a preference for judgment based on the color of your skin rather than our personal accomplishments.</p>
<p>Was Abraham Lincoln “bitter and insecure” when he worked to eliminate the institution of slavery back in the 1860s? Was the Supreme Court “bitter and insecure” when it supported the cause of black student Linda Brown in the landmark case “Brown v. Board of Education” for denouncing the inherent inequality of the preferential treatment of whites in public schools? Was Martin Luther King Jr. “bitter and insecure” when he expounded the merits of a race-blind society back in the 1960s? Was the United States “bitter and insecure” as a nation when it sent troops overseas to defeat Hitler’s army?</p>
<p>I can guarantee that you will answer “no” to each of these individual questions. However, I am placing each of these questions within the same ethical grounds as affirmative action through the way that it discriminates against majorities. The scope of this argument goes far beyond college admissions. This concept can be generalized into any ethical argument that exerts the fullest demands to recognize the fundamental difference between right and wrong. </p>
<p>Your quote here, however, is ethically permissible because a college has the right to choose among talent that would best benefit the school: “Colleges want different things and have different objectives in creating class. Some colleges want to increase the number of engineers, while others want to increase the number of artists.”</p>
<p>I/we Caucasians/Asians have nothing to offer to a college environment?! I am not going to bother explaining my personal resume, but I will assert that many of us are aspiring scientists, activists, humanitarians, and authors among equally laudable ambitions. What you construe to be “bitterness and insecurity” is my own intolerance for the perpetuation of a prejudicial policy.</p>
<p>It is likely that Native Americans are such a small sample size that mean-value statistics are not very reliable since outliers can disrupt an accurate representation of the average score and not truthfully portray the level at which Native Americans achieve scholastically.</p>
<p>Well in my case I tend doubt myself alot so I don’t really know if your argument is legitimate for all minorities are just myself. When I got my ACT score back I thought they must have sent me the wrong score, I just recently found out I got a 100 on my biology final and thought that the TAs must have mis-scored the test. I never really considered myself smart before being accepted to Yale, so yeah I doubted my own qualifications to get into Yale. But judging from my grades here so far (knock on wood, no jinx) I am a lot smarter than I actually thought.</p>
<p>In response to those who criticize my use of language:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was placing a chronological limit at the front of the sentence to demonstrate the applicability of a point I was making. It was an absolute necessity that I denoted that the statement following was only pertinent to the present.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The fundamental purpose of using language is to use words that work to best express one’s ideas. My arguments “make sense” because they are morally and ethically righteous and are not rooted in the endorsement of racist policies like those of others. Further, when I write online posts, I am not taking the SAT nor am I preparing a final draft of a research paper or anything of similar consequence. I am posting to anonymous members of an online message board. There is only so much time I can dedicate to this since, like everyone else, time is minimal, particularly considering that my high school is still in session. Thus, although I attempt to avoid carelessness in the mechanics of my language, I do not have the time to dissect every word and sentence of my posts.</p>
<p>That is excellent, Dbate. I am more than happy to hear that. But the precise problem with affirmative action for minorities is that despite your success you will be looked upon until you can prove otherwise. In a non-AA system, this would never be the case.</p>
<p>"for minorities is that despite your success you will be looked upon until you can prove otherwise. In a non-AA system, this would never be the case. "</p>
<p>I am not perpetually speaking out of anger. I have been irritated during this discussion yet not infuriated in any way. I am grieved that affirmative action does no benefit to either side of the debate despite the apparent wrongs that it seems to remedy when viewed from a superficial level.</p>
<p>I got rejected from Yale. I’m an Indian.
I have great scores, grades, recs, essays, all that jazz</p>
<p>I’m not white and I sure did face discrimination/racism when I came to this country. I had to live in the bad part of LA and live below the poverty line for a few years.
How does that make me different from say a Hispanic who lived in the same neighborhood as me, went to the same school as me, parents had the same income level as mine, had the same opportunities in school as me? He’s a URM and Im an ORM.</p>
<p>Im not saying thatI was rejected because i am an indian.
Im saying that I faced the same things some Hispanic kids have to and it is not fair that they get a boost because of their race and I don’t. How can you justify AA then?
If this is truly about ‘fairness’ then why would you not extend those privileges to an Asian like me? We face discrimination too.</p>
<p>“In a non-AA system, this would never be the case.”</p>
<p>So I get looked down on at Nordstrom because of affirmative action? My son gets looked down on in the 7-11 because of affirmative action? My husband can’t get a taxi because of affirmative action?</p>
<p>I know that has nothing to do with college admissions, so I REALLY am done.</p>
<p>I genuinely understand why you are so peeved, but I can’t help wonder if it will seem a little smaller at another stage of your life.</p>
<p>As much as i would like to disagree with Mifune his arguements are not white male rage, but border on resigned indignation.</p>
<p>I think everyone knows that the only reason there is affirmative action in the first place is because minorities has a group do worse on standardized tests than thier white and Asians counterparts. To debate this issue is pointless it is a fact. Likewise it is pointless to debate the qualifications of individuals who are accepted to a certain institution as their acceptance is their’s alone and can not be subsquently confereed to a rejected student post-decision. </p>
<p>The real discussion people should be having is how we can alleviate the test score gap that permeates ethnic groups regardless of socioeconomic status. Essentially, we should explore the question of why minorities are preforming worse, not whether or not they deserve to be accepted to certain schools.</p>
<p>I doubt that will be much of a problem, if I keep my grades up I should be able to graduate at least cum laude and if I work especially hard I will probably hit summa. </p>
<p>Besides I am very accustomed to being considered dumb until I prove otherwise as every intellectual competition I have ever been to I could tangibly feel people’s lower perception of me. This of course is inconsequential to the fact that I typically did better than those who looked down on me in the first place.</p>