<p>Often is not the same as segregated, it is not even most of the time. </p>
<p>You need to provide evidence that White Churches are segregated by socioeconomic class, to the same degree as the Black inner churches are segregated along racial lines.</p>
<p>Good luck. </p>
<p>By the way, the degree of segregation is almost complete in poor Black Churches. What are the chance that the token one White family in a Black Church is south of the Mason Dixon? What are the chances that the token White family belongs to the White Wealthy class?</p>
<p>"In the case of the poor Black kids, the race question helps Adcoms determine if the Black applicant is from a Black World of poor inner city urban Blacks where the churches and community centers as well as schools he was attending did not have the knowledge/ information and resources to get kids ready for admission to top colleges. "</p>
<p>perazziman, you had said this a thousand times and everyone told you this doesn’t make sense at all a thousand times. No matter how many times you said it, it is still invalid.</p>
<p>With computers and internet available, a kid with determination can go to a liberary to do his/her search. There is no need for information from a specific community. </p>
<p>Don’t people see so many kids come on College Confidential to find information? Even myself come here to Find more information.</p>
<p>We appear to have read the same sentence but understood its meaning differently. When the authors wrote, “In addition, people at the top of the social hierarchy often associate with each other to maintain their status and separate themselves from those who do not have as much prestige and power,” I interpreted that as providing evidence against your claim that your hypothetical “poor white kid” would benefit from attending the same church as a “rich white kid.” To me, segregation is not relevant in that sentence.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I don’t. Even if “white churches” are not segregated by socioeconomic class, the source you provided did not support your central claim of knowledge spillover effects: it stated that “people at the top of the social hierarchy often associate with each other to maintain their status and separate themselves from those who do not have as much prestige and power.”</p>
<p>The assumption in your claim is that poor whites who attend the same churches as rich whites benefit from shared knowledge. By contrast, poor blacks cannot attend the same churches as rich whites or otherwise do not have any equivalent sources of knowledge in their churches. But as I’ve been trying to show you, your own source states that even if “white” and “black churches” contain both rich and poor, the rich often “separate themselves” from the poor.</p>
<p>I hope your source wasn’t the strongest piece of evidence you found, because if it is, you have nothing to back up your claim.</p>
<p>Everything you tried to argue for black can be achieved by socioeconomical preference. </p>
<p>As many had already told you so many times, proxy with race is a worse way for college admissions officers than using direct socioeconomical status. You just refuse to get it. (refuse is the keyword)</p>
<p>As in a case that one said ‘If I put on sun glasses I can see colors better’ and everyone told him ‘No, if you take off your sun glasses you will see colors better.’ This person just refuse to admit.</p>
<p>^ You replied my post but still cannot provide ANY evidence. You are afraid to reply because you don’t have any supporting evidence except keep bringing up ‘balck world’ which had been told over and over that is not a valid point! :-)</p>
<p>perazziman, you have no place to ask fabrizio to bring evidence when you didn’t provide any. Bring your SUPPORTINNG evidence first (your source proved his point).</p>
<p>As fabrizio quoted
the source you provided did not support your central claim of knowledge spillover effects: it stated that “people at the top of the social hierarchy often associate with each other to maintain their status and separate themselves from those who do not have as much prestige and power.”</p>
<p>That’s from source you provided, if you don’t trust the souce yourself you should not bring it here.</p>
<p>No, I don’t. As I said, even if “white churches” are not segregated by socioeconomic class, your source does not support your claim: “people at the top of the social hierarchy often associate with each other to maintain their status and separate themselves from those who do not have as much prestige and power.” That can apply within “white churches” (and apparently “black churches” too).</p>
<p>Now you don’t have to believe that. But that was from the source that you found to support your point. You are welcome to find another one that actually supports your claim.</p>
<p>The question is how ** often** do Wealthy Whites separate themselves from poor Whites? In this case we are talking about Wealthy Whites as those who attended top schools that require SAT and SAT subject tests etc for admissions.</p>
<p>So, where is your evidence that Wealthy Whites are completely separated from poor White churches or that poor Whites do not attend Wealthy White Churches? Afterall, I have given you evidence that in Black churches on average there is only one White family that associates with them. So, what does that say about the number of White families that associate with Black Churches that are not on the west coast, that are below the Mason Dixon line, that are in poor inner city neighborhoods, that are not Catholic? I would say, the chances that a Wealthy White family will belong to such a Black church is zero. This would explain why adcoms do what they do. </p>
<p>I think I should share my son’s example, to show you why I believe what I believe. Then, you can share your own or your child’s example to prove your point.</p>
<p>my son attended poor inner city elementary and middle schools. He was in the top 10% of his class at these schools (mostly As, occassional B). In 7th grade he took the SAT under the Duke University Talent Identification Program. He got, 50 percentile rank compared to other 7th graders, nationally. In 8th grade he had finished High School Algebra I with an A. We were very proud of him. We thought he was on his way to a selective college.</p>
<p>When it was time to start high school, my son had to transfer to a wealthy suburban public high school, where the majority were Whites and Asians (four kids this year to Stanford). My wife had lost her job so we had to move. At the end of first year at this high school, he got C in Geometry and a mixture of Bs and Cs in his other classes. We were shocked. His PSAT score was 173 (83 percentile), better than before but not as good as the kids he was studying with now. So you see it is about the schools one attends. If my son had attended elementary and middle school here his scores and performance would be much better. The only reason so many kids at his present high school had higher PSAT scores was because they prepared and knew how to prepare. The kids from the high school he would have gone, always had low SAT scores because they do not prepare or know how to prepare. They do not have the knowledge and the resources. Once the resource are made available these differences fade away. As they are in the case of my son.</p>
<p>Your msg 845 is because you cannot answer any questions and you spin. :-)</p>
<p>And you already lose your argument to fabrizo after your source proved his point so there is no need for anyone to spend time on your recurrent opinion.</p>
<p>Ahh, when you said “It does not get talked about much because zip code discrimination is not illegal, where as race discrimination is illegal.”<br>
you CONFIRMED that Affirmative Action (race discrimination) should not have been existed.</p>
<p>“The only reason so many kids at his present high school had higher PSAT scores was because they prepared and knew how to prepare.”</p>
<p>Just curious: How do you know that these students prepared for the PSAT? My experience has been that most students at public high schools, EVEN suburban ones, do NOT study or prepare for the PSATs. Are you making an assumption about these students, or do you have actual information to support that fact that their scores were the result of test prep and studying?</p>
<p>It is not about just preparing for the PSAT, but the whole environment of preparing and knowing what is coming up and being ready for college admissions. It is a different environment- a different world. I see how my child’s performance has improved so drastically from the early days of 173 on the PSAT when approximately 20-30 percent of the kids or more in his high school scored higher than him on the PSAT to now when less than 1% scored higher than him in Junior year. Now, he is looking at being one of a few national merit semifinalists at his high school. He is taking 5 AP and 2 honor classes this year. There is only one science course and math course left at his high school that he has not taken, which he will take next year. His friends are kids who compete in national mathematics competitions and attend philosophy clubs after school etc. Contrast this, with the fact that at the other high school where he would have gone, there were no national merit semifinalist and only one kid made commended out of 900 last year. So, do you think any of them were ready to compete in national math and science competitions? The expectations were completely different there, maggiedog and that is what they live upto.</p>
<p>We seem to have a very hard time communicating with each other. It seems like you are not understanding my points, and I freely acknowledge that I had a very hard time understanding yours at first.</p>
<p>You seem to believe that I am suggesting the possibility that wealthy whites purposefully avoid attending the same churches as poor whites. I am not. My reading of your source’s finding, “people at the top of the social hierarchy often associate with each other to maintain their status and separate themselves from those who do not have as much prestige and power,” allows for the possibility that within a church, the wealthy associate with each other and separate themselves from the poor.</p>
<p>That is, it is not that wealthy whites attend different churches than poor whites, though they may. Rather, if a church has both wealthy whites and poor whites, the wealthy will associate with each other and separate themselves from the poor…within the same church.</p>
<p>So I don’t need to provide any evidence that wealthy whites attend different churches than poor whites. As long as wealthy whites do not associate with poor whites within the same church beyond basic pleasantries, your source does not confirm your point at all. Your rationale relies entirely on knowledge spillover, and your source states that the wealthy do not associate with the poor for reasons of status, prestige, and power.</p>
<p>To repeat myself once more, you are welcome to find another source that supports your claim of knowledge spillover effects between wealthy and poor whites. The source you found does not support your claim at all; to the contrary, it weakens it.</p>
<p>Thanks for clarifying because I did not realize this is what you were suggesting. I think, on this issue we have some agreement, I realize it is not easy or automatic to get information from that class, even when you are within their world. For example, even as my son attended one of those high schools from where children of well educated wealthy families go to top schools, information was not always as freely available as we would have wanted. Apparently, it helps to be on the PTA and hob knob with the right people to get the right information. Consequently, son ended up being thrown into AP Computer Science in 9th grade, which was unnecessary. In Junior year son signed up for 5 AP classes (the most he could) because nobody told him he only needed two to graduate on the distinguished plan and he thought AP were the same as honor level classes for Juniors and Seniors. So, yes these kinds of surprises can happen to the children of poor people (like us), so I am sure it can happen in churches where the wealthy go too. </p>
<p>On the other hand, I can understand if the Adcoms believe kids should have the social skills and resources to get past these obstacles, when they are living in the same world, with people who have answers. In my son’s case he began to get past these obstacles, slowly. After all, there are children of well educated people who are not quite that rich, but who are tremendously capable. Then there are wealthy with a heart too. So, even if the White wealthy family may not like the parents of these capable kids, they will encourage their children to associate with them. In my son’s case, breaking into that circle required visiting the chess club at his high school, where the top chess player was two years senior to him, a National Merit Finalist and admitted to Rice University. My son lost the first game and then never lost again to the school champion or anyone at his school after that. Infact, he has been know to play the number two and number three simultaneously and beat them both. These kids that play chess with him in turn compete in mathematics, computers or some other science competitions and will share information with my son because they like him. In return my son enjoys their company and shares his chess secrets with them. I believe Adcoms want to know if applicants have these social skills. However, to expect young children to overcome racial barriers across churches is a very different thing.</p>
<p>Can you give a more general source to provide information that college admission officers use zip code to determine admission? I read some of the recent posts in this thread and you stated using of zip codes is not illegal. So can you provide the ivy college name? And also can you prove this is general in most elite colleges than the one you visited?</p>