smooth

You have this wonderful penchant for ripping a single sentence from a lengthy post and thinking you've rebutted the arguments I laid out.

Let me refresh your memory:

I applied and was accepted into my graduate program two years ago.
As I said, perhaps application forms have changed since you applied.

However,
You didn't answer any of the other points I raised.
Furthermore, your statement that there was a section explaining to outline any racial diversity you could offer the university doesn't support your point that affirmative action programs are based "purely" on race.

It supports mine that an admission's committee will look at race among other factors. One of the most important factors is your cherished impoverished category. You may remember it under the section asking about your parents education and income. If you don't remember it, go back and re-read your application.

I also posted the federal government's website for loan money. There is an entire section devoted to parents' income and education level--all of which is reported to the school.

Yes, your facts are still wrong. Please educate yourself on the topic so I don't have to repeat myself.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

raveneye

Well I am a person who has been employed to enforce AA in a college admissions setting, and I can add several points to this discussion.

(1) It is entirely possible and indeed easy to admit college applicants blind. You simply have the admissions secretary fill out an excel spreadsheet with all the grades and test scores, names replaced by a code, and separate the essays from the rest of the application, and she emails the spreadsheet to everybody on the admissions committee. The "quality" of the applicant is determined close to 100% by the grades, test scores, and essays, and these are easy to evaluate without ever seeing the person's name, picture, country of origin, or knowing the person's race, gender, or ethnicity.

(2) If you do this, then the proportion of minorities admitted (blacks and Hispanics mainly) drops by about 50% below what it would have been under a racial quota system.

(3) Most colleges and universities have female majorities, so AA in favor of females is no longer an issue in college admissions. In fact, many places actually (secretly) practice preferential admissions for males, to counter the ongoing trend of increasing proportion of females.

(4) The Regents of the University of California voted in 1995 to abandon quotas in college admissions for the University of California. Their reasons were essentially the standard conservative argument: discrimination in and of itself is wrong because it is an injustice to the individual impacted, regardless who that individual is. In fact the most vocal UC Regent in support of ending quotas was a black regent (by the name of Ward Connerly).

(5) My feeling based on my own experience in admitting underqualified minorities to university is that this practice does not benefit these students. Most either drop out in shame, or are allowed to go through the system under a substantially lower standard of evaluation than everybody else. These students often become socially stigmatized.

(6) And it is worth pointing out that numerical quotas are unconstitutional. There have been several Supreme Court rulings now that have established that.

If explicit numerical quotas are unconstitutional, I think it is legitimate to ask: why should a nod and a wink then be constitutional? Why should a secret and unstated magnitude of preference be constitutional while an explicit, concrete preference is not?

Strange Famous

they might think that they'd made some racially insensitive political statement....but who just jacked them for a load of virtually free cup cakes??!

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

FoolThemAll

They're not all socially conservative. Whether you mean politically or personally.

And it's been my experience that, yes, they are a fun bunch of guys. A few are a bit belligerent when it comes to political discussions (I'm sure this isn't a problem when it comes to politically liberal campus groups), but fun otherwise.

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

Strange Famous

for real? youre lucky... I used to hang around some of the communist activists, and they werent ever much fun... always took things so serious.

I think, it is to be politically... but when you are young it sometimes isnt good to be so caught up in realpolitik... you should be pursuing ideals and unworkable anarchist theories... not pushing for middle class rebates and increased defence spending...

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Seaver

I love how quickly you point out how wrong I am when you never even knew what my application said. Sorry, but YOU ARE WRONG and I'm sick of you claiming that I am. Parent education level was on there, but income was not. SO, what does that tell you... but that YOU ARE WRONG (annoying isnt it?).

And, your facts about how white females are the biggest group being helped... I never refuted. I dont care WHO is being helped, the fact is helping out one group because of race, and I'll insert sex here, is wrong without helping out the rest. Now, I'll let you stop reposting facts that have nothing to do with my argument and posting how wrong I am because quite frankly, I'm sick of your holier than thou attitude when you know nothing of my own facts.

OFKU0

I think it's terrible these students have singled out the lowly cupcake and used it to forward the AA agenda. If it were a bagel that was being objectified, there would be hell to pay I say, hell to pay.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

smooth

I know what your application said, Seaver, because it's the same one every student in the United States fills out when they apply for student aid at a university. The FAFSA is a standard form, there is no personal form you filled out that differed from mine, except those in addition to the standard government forms.
The fact that you don't understand a link between parents' education/income level and your class position indicates more about your assumptions and resulting arguments than mine, in my opinion.

If you are referring to admissions procedures, seperate from funding, then the magic form is the Statement of Purpose. Otherwise known as your application essay or personal statement. Such an essay problematizes what raveneye claimed--that admissions could be determined blind--because you get to load it up with all the personal reasons motivating you to attend college. Those reasons could include anything you want--right down to how poor you are, or how discriminated against you feel for whatever reasons.

So, while true I don't know how you filled those sections out, that in no way detracts from my accurate statements that you could have availed yourself of them to obtain preferential treatment based on your personal economic situation.

Perhaps you didn't fill out a FAFSA. Perhaps you didn't fill out a fee waiver for your application fee. Perhaps you gave no information regarding your finances and the school made no financial offer of assistance and was unable to calculate your family's expected contribution.

Or perhaps you are the one who tried to come down off the mount and proclaim how affirmative action works and its evils wrought upon the world--until someone busted your grape. Don't get it twisted--my "holier than thou attitude" was a response to your posts and to the conservative members' SOP of posting inaccurate statements and then ignoring contrary evidence even when tit's posted several times in a thread.

What I find annoying is that you would continue to post something that isn't true as if it were.
When the facts indicate I am wrong, I rethink my position on the matter and respond accordingly.
Hopefully now you're sick enough to quite posting assumptions based on inaccurate information as fact.


You never refuted that white women are the single largest beneficiary of affirmative action?
Well, you see, that would be included in the very first point of you entering this debate and claiming that affirmative action was and is based "solely on race." A point I felt compelled to respond to. And, as anyone can scroll back and ascertain for themselves, I even asked if you were railing against a government program that discriminates in general or one that does so according to race.

You responded that you were upset about racially based discrimination programs and that you would prefer that assistance be based on class. You now say that discrimination programs that favor races and/or sex are bad. I've accurately pointed out that, in reality, class is one of the ways college funding and admissions are determined by committees.


This wraps right back to the original post of the thread: about students becoming upset and demonstrating against a process they apparently don't understand. If they did, they would have asked the students approaching how much their parents earned--just like school lunch programs, just like all government sliding scale programs, even just like their own tuition was calculated.

Goodness, did I ever have a truckload of grammatical errors in there!

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

roachboy

i remember reading about this particular type of simpleminded rightwing agitprop some time ago--i thought the actions stupid then---they seem even worse now because they have been done over and over.
sometimes i think that conservatives are particularly good at undertaking actions that show the worst of them to those they would pretend to want to "convert"---making a fortress out of independence hall after 911 spring to mind, or covering the guernica at the un for powells' justification show for bushwar...this too--it is almost as if the right wants to show the superficiality of its thinking as its strong suit.

as for the question of admissions.financial aid: i have been teaching at the university level for some time, and my experience with these questions runs directly parallel to what smooth has been saying in his posts above.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Seaver

Forget it, you're not budging, and I'm not going to be convinced that racial preference is acceptable.

smooth

Well Seaver, my only response is that I sincerely hope you don't overlook the deeper meaning behind this typo of mine:

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Strange Famous

bagel's are delicious

But I dont think that Jewish students are alleged to benefit from AA in college admission, so it wouldt really make the same point.

But AA is not about "reverse discrimination" - its about levelling the playing field. We know that at HS a black or hispanic student faces a lot of discrimination and disadvantages - we can make a rational assumption that a C grade for a black student if equal to a B grade for a white student. Of course, some individual white students may face more disadvantages that some individual black students - this is understood - but in general we know the ethnic minority students will experience a TENDENCY for discrimination against them. We know that - for example - the black students C represents the same level of actual ability as the white students B.

This is the purpose of AA. This is what it means. Not to reverse disrciminate, but to attempt to adjust for existing discrimination to create a fair result. If you dont agree with the assumption it is based on (ie you dont believe that black, indian, hispanic kids suffer racism which disadvantages them at school... I would personally question your perception of reality.. but that is a view that it is possible to take) - but it is disappointing that so many people have represented what seem to be well made arguments on the issue - while not understanding, or willfully misunderstanding, what AA means.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

hannukah harry

uhm no. an innercity black student with a C probably has much less of an understanding as a white kid from the 'burb's with a B. because the white kid doesn't have to deal with as many problems from the students, drugs, gangs, having to 'look toiugh' just to not get beat up (and walkinig home with your books is a sign of weakness to some). chances are the black kids teachers do not push them as hard, do not give as much homework or test them as rigorously as a teacher from a school in the suburb. considering that there is a much better developed parental support system for kids with more affluent familes than poor kids (because the parents often have to work more than full time to put food ont he table), they're more likely to do their homework and get extra help than the inner city kid.

education is skewed to the rich, so if someone is taking algebra at an inner city high school and someone else at one in the suburbs, then most of the time a lower grade in the burbs would show an equivelant understanding of the material compared with a higher grade in the city.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Strange Famous

I think thats what I said, Im not sure why youre disagreeing with me!

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

hannukah harry

no, it's not what you said. i am disagreeing with you.

i'm saying the exact opposite. a black student in the city with a C has a far less understanding than a white kid in the 'burbs with a B. if the grades were reversed, then maybe they would be equivelent, but as you stated them, no, they're probably even farther apart than the letter grade implies.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Seaver

Ok, then "level" the playing field without using race.

Here in Texas there's the 10% rule. If you graduate from a public highschool in the top 10% of your class, you're automatically accepted to any public college in the state. This helps those from both rural and inner city, it's blind to race, and blind to economics.

About your leveling the playing field because of discrimination, while it exists, as I pointed out I dont believe it would do anything but compound the issue. Racism wont go away if you reinforce it.

Manx

Racism won't go away. Period. It's idealistic to the point of defeatism to think the only acceptable way to deal with racism is with a method that will make it go away.

What you call reinforcement is nothing more than bringing awareness to its existence. Racism will increase if you ignore it.

smooth

How is this program "blind to economics"?

Do you agree that wealthier families can afford to transport their children to impoverished districts where competition might present less of a problem to students who were better prepared purely as a function of better access to materials and more qualified teachers rather than intelligence?


Let me put it another way: If I wanted a surefire way to guarantee my child's admission to a college under such a system, I would either wait until my child's senior year before enrolling him or her in the most impoverished school I could find or I would start from day one and educate my child with private tutors.

If my child had access to his or her own vehicle or a private driver, what would prevent such lateral movement? While the poorest (and blackest) students are bused to a battleground, drug and gang infested environment, without textbooks, computers, or even chairs in many cases, my child could come home for lunch and quickly move in and out of such an environment at will.

A number of factors, well documented in sociological and criminological literature, related to the color of my child's skin color and class level along with teacher assumptions and expectations, would garner my child better grades (labeling theory), a counselor who paid attention to his or her progress toward college (tracking), and a slot in a public college (self-fulfilling prophecy).

Everything I described is structural.
Those inner-city students wouldn't stand a chance.

for a light read, check out The Saints and the Roughnecks by Bill Chambliss.
I wonder if it's on-line.

I hope some people read this: http://alpha.fdu.edu/~peabody/Lexico...oughnecks.html

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

filtherton

Why shouldn't race be used? Race is part of any number of involuntary personal characteristics that contribute to socioeconomic status. Why should race be less important than income?

Seaver

The way the State works you cant just pick up and move on a whim to a new district. It was implemented to stop schools from "buying" players to move to their football team, it also prevents that.

Same reason race should not bar you from voting.

Ok, so because minorities are in general poorer than whites, I wont refute that. What I'm refuting is that rich minorities need help when poor whites dont. Go with a blind economics policy with regard to helping and I'll be 100% behind that.

hannukah harry

smooth,
how dare you try to add nuance to this issue? i want black and white, cut and dry, no thinking! if you keep posting trash like this that will actually make me have to think critically about the issue and not rely on 'but it's reverse racism', then i'm taking my ball and i'm going home!

xoxo

HH

(btw, interesting article. )

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Lebell

A glib and insulting post, as if those of us who are against AA cannot or will not think.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Seaver

Lebell beat me to it.

j8ear

His entire repertoire of contributions to this thread have been exclusively glib and insulting. Not a thought provoking, insightful, or forwarding thinking post in the bunch. It is how the left MUST reframe their failed polcies. Without glibness or insults they have nothing but failures. With glibness and insults they try to create scaapegoats...one who won't spend enough or steal from the successful enough. Someone has to be demonized...it certainly can't be their failures. Personal responsibility be damned.

What really scares me though is this:

I fear deeply for the students indoctrinated by roachco and his boyspeak...especially when they're all essentially "nuanced" down to the following:

Over and over the left, takes this view of rational and reasoned disagreement with the demonstrably failed policies so feverishly advocated for and championed by his band of failure experiencing policy perveyors.

Affirmative Action is RACISM or SEXISM. No two ways about it. It is disgusting and dispicable.

They're better ways to "LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD" but continuing racism doesn't help. The goals are laudable, but the end result fails to accomplish the stated goal. Lebell is on the right track with education funding state wide instead of district specific, as is TEXAS with it's 10% gaurantee of admission (remember even the top 10% of the worst socio-ecominically depressed schools are admitted).

Racism, state sponsored or private sector perpetuated is never a solution. It is but a metastacy of the original 'cancer.'

For a cliché parting thought:

"Two wrongs don't make a right"

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

sprocket

I find it hilarious and totally ironic that the same group of people who abhore racial profiling in regard to terrorism and police work etc LOVE the idea of racial profiling for college applications and job opportunities..

Cant quite make that logical leap myself..

__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are.

filtherton

Do you also find it hilarious that the irony goes both ways? I'm still waiting for the "well, minorities are statistically less likely to be successful students so..."

sprocket

Actually I do. Should have said so in my post.

__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are.

Manx

All those words, and the best "solution" to racism you have is statewide education funding?

That's the "solution" to the "failed" policies of the left?

Please.

There is no solution to racism. You can't solve it. You can't make it "right". The best you can do is circumvent its negative consequences. The best method of doing that is AA.

hannukah harry

hmm... is that this new 'hyperbole' thing i've just heard about? (oy vey, there i go again!) because otherwise, you're quite inaccurate.

sarcastic comments: #5 - in response to a sarcastic comment made by someone else. #23 - not really sarcastic other than the line wrapping it up, far from used in appropriately. #61 - very glib and sarcastic, crossing the line? don't know. directed at all conservatives? no. probalby should have been clearer that it was meant for one person, seeing as how it was going off a post directed at that person. upon being shown to be incorrect about things he said, and having other information given that he appearantly chose to ignore, i posted a parody of what i've interpreted his position as. disagree with me? that's your decision.

non-sarcastic and glib comments (appearantly fictitious, since to quote you, ): #13, #18, #20, #23 (other than last line), #53, #55. if you care to know what they're about, feel free to go back and read them.

hmm... so if you don't like the joke, then it must be glib and insulting? feel free to shoot the messenger (figuratively!), but that doesn't mean that the message is bad (and that there isn't a better messange out there).

and who are we scapegoating? i have scapegoated anyone. i haven't demonized anyone. i haven't made any claims about people not spending enough or that they shoudl steal. mind clueing me in to how you came to this conclusion?



personal responsibility's been dead, or near-dead, for quite awhile. and both sides are to blame. but i fail to see what personal responsibilty has to do with AA.

anyways, i think i'm gonna bow out of this debate. seems to me nothing is going to be said one way or another that will make anyone even give a second consideration to their prior beliefs. if you can't even read posts that disagree with you to see that they are not all 'glib and sarcastic,' then i don't think there's any point in keeping the veneer or a discussion/debate going. that's kinda the point that post. thank you for confirming it for me.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Lebell

This post has degenerated to the point where nothing new is being offered except sarcasm and insult.

Closed.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!