What should I put for race?

Hope_Full · January 14, 2009, 1:05pm

AvantTao, I didn’t say they were screwed. I said that those who attend HYSP schools have an easier time getting into better graduate schools. I don’t think this point is controversial or debatable. Nor did I say that only HYSP schools place people in medical school. But, again, my guess is that a Harvard grad has an easier time than a Bates grad getting into medical school, all other things being equal.

Keilexandra, I admire your determination. Do you mind if I ask you a question? Are the youngest child in your family? I am the oldest and I find that my younger brother has a much easier time seeking his own path than I do. I wonder if it is because I am the oldest. I see this pattern in many of my friends.

pennypac · January 14, 2009, 1:26pm

“…those who attend HYSP schools have an easier time getting into better graduate schools. I don’t think this point is controversial or debatable. Nor did I say that only HYSP schools place people in medical school. But, again, my guess is that a Harvard grad has an easier time than a Bates grad getting into medical school, all other things being equal.”

I agree, it’s not debatable; it’s not true–except for a very, very, small percentage of applicants–the marginal borderlines. In any other instance, the effect is negligible. So go to school, study hard, do your best (for YOU, and nobody else but you!) and you will be fine.

MattsMomFL · January 14, 2009, 2:59pm

Hopefull, this is the 08 Class at Pomona’s (a typical small top LAC) graduate plans. I have this at easy reach because son is '13. The grad schools are hardly shabby, and they tied for 3rd with Brown for most Fulbright Scholars at 23 (which is if you figure it on a per capita ratio (Pomna’s classes run around 375) puts Brown and the schools at 1 & 2 to shame).

I also want to add that my brother went to St John’s U, went to Penn State Med, got a PhD in biochemistry there while he was at it, and is now on the faculty at Yale and on his way to becoming the Chairman of his department. Sometimes being a big fish in a small pond is a good (and certainly much less stressful) thing.

So, no matter the path - life is what you make it.

<a href=“http://www.pomona.edu/cdo/2008wheregradsgo.pdf[/url]”>http://www.pomona.edu/cdo/2008wheregradsgo.pdf</a>

Anon_Person_1 · January 14, 2009, 3:42pm

My 2 cents: Why is diversity only the color of your skin? Personally, to me, that’s a racist opinion that because you are black, white, or any other color that you are fundamentally “different”. To me, diversity is being in a room full of people interested in totally different things.

fabrizio · January 14, 2009, 7:03pm

Re #892

I can’t help but laugh at the “sans economics” comment. Given that Asians have a “…propensity to gravitate towards…math,” it really shouldn’t be a surprise that Asians also gravitate more towards economics, the most quantitative of the social sciences, should it?

Maybe. Or maybe you should take a look at Espenshade and Chung’s 2005 paper that found, all else equal, an Asian applicant faces a loss of 50 points when compared to a non-athlete non-legacy white applicant. Keywords: all else equal and 50 points.

fabrizio · January 14, 2009, 7:11pm

Re: #892, part 2

And, here we have it. According to Wikipedia, Godwin’s Law holds that the probability of references to Hitler or National Socialism approaches one as the length of an online discussion increases. I would like to propose Fabrizio’s Law: in affirmative action discussions, the probability of the statement “test scores should not be everything” or like variants approaches one following the introduction of the issue of Asian discrimination.

Many highly educated people who are defenders of the status quo succumb to the fallacy of assuming that anybody who is against affirmative action is also for a “one test determines your life” system.

Edit

I see that Keilexandra has already spotted the fallacy of “don’t like affirmative action? you must love the chinese gaokao idea!”

Keilexandra · January 14, 2009, 7:22pm

Hope Full: Actually, I’m the eldest and was an only child for 11 years. My little sister will have a much easier time of it than me, I’m sure. But I acknowledge that I am unusual in the Asian immigrant community.

fabrizio: Exactly! I personally think the Chinese gaokao, like the one in I believe Korea, is a fundamentally flawed idea. I’m a huge supporter of holistic admissions; I just don’t believe race should be one of the considered factors, at least in public schools.

Tyler09 · January 14, 2009, 8:06pm

If you are going to support holistic admissions as opposed to a strict, standard-based “meritocracy”, then you can’t argue that you should be able to select the mission statement of any specific school. Because educators believe that diversity (including ethnic, economic, gender, and cultural) enhances educational experience, the supreme court agreed and added that it was in the interest of the state, and research has shown that their is a net economic benefit from diversity in a class (minorities gain income from attending a top school when compared to a similar stat-wise candidate accepted to both but choosing a lower ranked school, while asians and whites see no change), those kinds of diversity are legitimate qualities to seek in a mission to build a class.

As such, if you support holistic admissions then you support individual colleges’ right to build a class holistically. Part of the definition of holistic admissions is not adhering to any strict standards. Because no two admissions are linear, or based on the same criteria in the same way, you cannot compare any two admissions as “more” or “less” anything. As one poster said earlier “you can’t have your cake and eat it too”.

In a way, affirmative action, which for the government requires colleges to request data on the ethnic background of students so that the public can hold them accountable, serves to protect whites and moreso asians against discrimination. Another key fallacy in this argument is that if you support affirmative action you must support discrimination against asian students.

fabrizio · January 14, 2009, 8:57pm

Re #904

I can support holistic admissions and oppose discrimination at the same time. There is no conflict.

I fail to see how racial data grants the public the ability to hold colleges accountable for their policies.

It certainly would be false thinking to believe that supporting affirmative action means supporting Asian discrimination, but I don’t believe that I or any other poster here has displayed that type of thinking.

I’m not sure if it’s in this thread or the original one, but I brought up the concept of “negative action” from William Kidder’s response to Espenshade and Chung’s paper. Kidder did not dispute Espenshade and Chung’s finding that all else equal, Asian applicants face a loss equivalent to 50 SAT points when compared to white applicants. Kidder only contested E&C’s conclusion that ending affirmative action helps Asians. He argued that Asians benefit from ending negative action, not affirmative action.

As I recall it, you - Tyler09 - were one of the few defenders of the status quo who supported the idea of ending negative action. Another defender staunchly opposed it, calling negative action a “lie.” The third defender expressed resigned indifference, saying that while it was a nice idea, ultimately, it couldn’t be implemented in real life and so was purely academic.

Swedefish · January 14, 2009, 9:09pm

@ fabrizio:
You would have understood my comments better had you seen them in relation to the OP in a thread that was merged into this super thread for all affirmative action debates. The OP in that thread asked if blacks have an advantage in college admissions and went on to imply that black applicants as a group are less qualified than Asian applicants based on SAT scores.

I read Espenshade and Chung’s 2005 paper and it did not change my opinion. Your interpretation of their results—“all else equal, an Asian applicant faces a loss of 50 points when compared to a non-athlete non-legacy white applicant”—only holds if the SAT constitutes “all else”. Their study does not consider factors such as GPA/class rank, ECs, likeability based on interviews, recommendations, or quality of essays, to mention a few important items that top colleges consider in the holistic admissions process. Consequently, one cannot say that e.g. a black applicant with a SAT score of 1800 necessarily is less qualified than an Asian applicant with a 2200 because the subjective data I just listed is unaccounted for. Espenshade and Chung seem to use the SAT, and in some examples the LSAT, as the foundation of their study and argue that if affirmative action was removed (read: if SATs were the sole decider in admissions), URM applicants would not get in as easily: “Eliminating affirmative action would substantially reduce the share of African Americans and Hispanics among admitted students… Asian applicants would gain the most. They would occupy four out of every five seats created by accepting fewer African-American and Hispanic students.”

I do not see how this statement is any different from the one I made when I wrote: “If test scores were the be-all end-all of college admissions, Asians as a collective (and it’s a huge collective) probably would get accepted at the most famous institutions at higher rates.” Furthermore, I never said that anyone who is against affirmative action necessarily is for a “one test determines your life system”. Like posters such as Tyler09, I believe that accepting holistic admissions, one cannot object to private institutions’ prerogative to define for themselves what they desire from their applicants.

Having engaged in a number of affirmative action debates on CC, I am yet to come across a convincing argument in opposition to such policies. More surprisingly, I also am yet to come across solid evidence that affirmative action disadvantages Asian students. I have seen multiple references to Espenshade and Chung’s article, but having read it I still feel that the intensity of the resentment against affirmative action among many CC members ought to be based on a study that considers the holistic admissions approach, not on a study based on SAT data. As mentioned earlier in this discussion, Asians also have advantages at many great colleges so dismissing Asian applicants as an inherently disadvantaged collective seems overly dramatic.

I think the following quote is the best take-away message from Espenshade and Chung that we should keep in mind as we discuss perceived advantages and disadvantages of affirmative action: “Elite colleges and universities extend preferences to many types of students, yet affirmative action is the one most surrounded by controversy.”

AvantTao · January 14, 2009, 9:11pm

There is geographical, gender, international, socioeconomic, non-athletic, and non-legacy discrimination as well in college admissions. What is the difference between that and choosing a student based on race? It’s only one other trait that makes up a person who they are.

MattsMomFL · January 14, 2009, 9:29pm

On a lighter note, my son (Pomona '13), who is NOT following this thread, just read me a poem that he wrote today:

College applications stink
They really make me mad
Because I never stopped to think
And realize that my grades are bad

I only applied to Yale
And Harvard and Princeton and Brown
But English and Physics I failed
And my GPAs are under the ground

Hope, however, might survive
'Cause even though I took a dive
At least I’m not an Asian

QuakerOats415 · January 14, 2009, 9:54pm

Instead I am Caucasian

MattsMomFL · January 14, 2009, 10:06pm

^^^Ha!!!

I like yours better!

I actually missed a line. The last group of verse should have read:

Hope, however, might survive
My chances are still amazing
'Cause even though I took a dive
At least I’m not an Asian

cavilier · January 14, 2009, 10:21pm

College admissions is a zero-sum game. By increasing the number of acceptances given to URMs, you must decrease the number of acceptances given to non-URMs, namely whites and Asians. And of course there are no studies involving holistic analysis. How do you expect anyone to measure quantitatively ECs and personality for a large group body of students? There is just no way. But even without any data, do you honestly believe you could attribute the discrepancy to the lack of holistic analysis? I am actually weakly in favor of AA, but I think it’s important that we are honest about the opportunity cost involved.

fabrizio · January 14, 2009, 10:35pm

Swedefish,

It’s not my interpretation. I’ll give you the direct quote: “Other things equal, …Asian-American applicants face a loss equivalent to 50 SAT points.”

Espenshade and Chung recognized that “the selective process at elite private institutions is typically more nuanced and subjective than the explicit point systems formerly relied on by…Michigan.” Often times, a model used in research must simplify reality, as was clearly done and explicitly stated by Espenshade and Chung. Nevertheless, after four years, there has only been one published academic response to Espenshade and Chung (Kidder). I reiterate that Kidder did not dispute Espenshade and Chung’s -50 point disadvantage. He only criticized them for conflating negative action and affirmative action.

You’re right. One can’t say that, and Espenshade and Chung DID NOT SAY THAT.

Espenshade and Chung did conclude that ending affirmative action would vastly benefit Asians. Kidder focused his response on this point and this point alone; he criticized the conclusion, not the methodology.

Well, I am glad to know that you don’t believe that opposing affirmative action must entail supporting numbers-only, and I apologize for my error.

I take it, then, that the principle of equal treatment without regard to race is not a convincing reason to oppose racial preferences?

I repeat: Espenshade and Chung’s finding that Asian applicants are disadvantaged has not been refuted by any scholar. William Kidder did publish a response to E&C’s paper, but he did not dispute Asian applicant disadvantage. In fact, he agreed that Asians were discriminated against and attributed it to negative action (cf. affirmative action).

I think it would be very difficult to write a paper about affirmative action using a model that “consider[ed] the holistic admissions approach.” You would have to quantify qualitative factors. Ask yourself, is that easy to do? Is that even necessary? Espenshade and Chung answered “no” to both questions. In his critique, Kidder himself used a model that focused only on LSAT scores while acknowledging that law schools consider many factors.

You may think E&C’s paper is bunk, but I’ll say it one last time: it has been four years since E&C’s paper was published, and to date, there has only been one formal academic response. And that response only castigated the authors for not realizing that negative action is distinct from affirmative action.

fabrizio · January 14, 2009, 10:39pm

According to the Supreme Court, race is a suspect class. Consequently, its usage must be subject to strict scrutiny, the highest standard. In contrast, none of the factors you have listed is a suspect class. At best, they would be analyzed under intermediate scrutiny. Especially in the case of socioeconomic preferences, rational basis - the weakest standard - is probably all that is needed.

theendusputrid · January 14, 2009, 11:01pm

Look, here’s the deal. It’s a basic question.

Does the United States of America want to become a colorblind society where people’s skin color matters as little as someone’s hair color?

If the answer is yes, you don’t consider applicants’ race or ethnicity when deciding whether or not to admit them.

If the answer is no, you do.

Look, there are very few Asians and Indians in the NFL and NBA, maybe those leagues should use affirmative action becaue there is “not enough diversity.” Seriously, college football programs were required to interview at least one black candidate for coaching positions because there “are not enough black coaches,” so this analogy works.

DreamingOutLoud · January 14, 2009, 11:22pm

“If only this were true, although blacks get an advantage when it comes to college admission, we have to face alot more in society than other races. I mean blacks of all socioeconomic classes are discriminated against bc in reality all people see when they look at me is a black male. This causes all the sterotypes to become associated with me, but I have noticed that every time I have started speaking (I am a really good speaker) people instantly change the way they treat me. It is rascist and we have to deal with alot more than people sometimes realize.
Like I know that I can not go to some of my Asian friend’s houses bc their parents do not like black people. And we all know that Asians are incredibly racist against black ppl, don’t even pretend as if that is not true. I know WAY to many Asians who have said the exact same thing.
In fact one of my Asian friends father said that if she married a black guy, he would not be able to show his face.
So much for being treated like kings :/”

Ddbate, that actually offended me a bit. Saying that Asians are racist is a HUGE generalization. My best friend is Asian and I have many other close friends who are Asian. I’m not sure where you live but race has never been a problem between us. Her family has always been extremely nice to me and if I called her house at 3 am in an emergency are something, there the kind of people who would want to help and wouldn’t get mad. I’m African American. She’s Asian. So? Why do people get so fixated on race?

Maybe its because I live in the east, I do not know, but I don’t feel that discrimination is very prevalent. It’s definitely still present to a certain extent but times are changing. People may be surprised to hear the way I speak and I absolutely hate when people say that I speak like a white person, seemingly suggesting that Black people can’t speak properly. Still, racism is lessening with everyday.

About the affirmative action, why do so many people worry about it? If a college really wanted you, they will accept you if your white. A friend of mine just got into to one of the HYP schools as an upperclass, white girl. It’s obviously possible.

Tyler09 · January 14, 2009, 11:54pm

^^endu, no it does not, because there have been no argued benefits of having diversity on a college basketball or football team. And if there was, than if the NFL and NBA decided to have a holistic signing program, which they currently do not, then as private bodies they could recruit more diverse players. Obviously this would be catastrophic because the fact is that players talented at those sports of those backgrounds are severely underrepresented. This would require a huge recruitment program starting with the youth in order to train players who are able to compete at NFL or NBA levels.

Once they did do this, I would oppose them. Why? Because I oppose AA in hiring outside recruitment. I think there is a difference between affirmative action for opportunities like a college education or a job training program, and AA in picking someone to do a job where you are paying them a salary. That is why I support the NFLs policy of forcing teams to interview and recruit black coaches, but they aren’t forced to hire them.

Nonetheless I think I would reluctantly support a private business’s right to hire urms if diversity is part of their mission and the image they wish to project.

theendusputrid, we can both want the same end equation, but have different ideas of the ends to get there. I consider this issue less about colorblindness in society and more about a colleges right to dictate its own holistic admission. But if this was an argument about which process would make America more color blind, i think I would win that too :)

What should I put for race?

CONNECT WITH US