California Colleges Mull Return of Affirmative Action

Well then you'd be contradicting the universities statements. If you can find proof of how heavily they weighed race such that it over ruled other qualifications, I'd be eager to read it. I hadn't heard that before.

I'm not saying race wasn't a factor. If there were 3 candidates who were all qualified they would take the one who's race they wanted to increase at the University. That's why racial make up would change at the Universities.

But if they had an African American, Asian, and Caucasion, and only the Asian met the minimum requirements to get in, then the Asian would be the one who got the spot.

 

The only way to fix this is to triple the salaries of teachers in the public school systems. Then get rid of government testing to rank schools and rank them on the number of students that graduate college.

You would create an environment where attaining a teaching position would be competitive. If you want to keep that position you need to show results in graduation rates and grade point.

Well educated kids would figure the college part out for themselves.

 

Right, I tried to have a candid and honest discussion with you and you retorted with intellectually dishonest tripe and MLK quotes. What's the point of my wasting my time trying to convince someone like you that there is a problem when it's painfully obvious to any casual observer that there is a problem? Seriously? Why bother? There's a huge disparity in income in this country and education is the overriding factor in that disparity. When certain groups of people largely based on race are at a disadvantage in the level of education they receive at the primary and secondary levels they're at that same disadvantage in college and therefore there at a disadvantage in income. There's a straight line correlation between education and income. This isn't rocket science, this isn't a mystery. It's completely obvious and your failure to recognize such is willful ignorance and intellectually dishonest. You have zero interest in addressing this problem, you're simply part of the conservative program of deconstructing all of the attempts to level the playing field over the last 50 years. From AA to the voting rights act to social welfare programs, your like are attacking these platforms with no solutions to replace them.

 

A merit based system fails when the tools aren't the same for every student. It's not a merit based system at all. It's who lives in the right neighborhood and has the right environment, schools, teachers, and infrastructure to compete and who doesn't. And if you don't then you have to work twice as hard be twice as lucky, twice as fortunate to compete. That's the system we have and it's wrong. This Pollyanna merit system stuff is nonsense.

What's really grating is that it seems many of you that participate in these arguments are here for your own racial preference. The fact that a better educated society benefits all of us in so many areas seems to fly right over your heads. Rather than promoting ways to really fix this issue so everyone is truly judged on the merits of their abilities and work ethic you want to battle along racial lines like pigs at the trough. It's shortsighted and stupid.

 

i'd be happy with keeping preferences and set-asides, but rejigger the criteria to emphasize household income, rather than ethnicity.

it would capture many (most?) of the same kids, and as those kids graduate and begin working, go some ways towards addressing income inequality.

 

Should the goal of a university be simply to admit the most qualified students, or should it be to provide its students the best education? In other word, is the priority to get the best inputs or the best outputs?

 

I agree with this - I have no problem with AA as a concept; but its implementation is fairly ineffective.

 

You have to read the ruling carefully, or just the article I posted carefully. The ruling isn't actually anti-affirmative action but that it is the states and not the USSC that decides whether to have them or not.

 

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. If all applicants were equal, it should be random, not based on skin color. You're advocating for racial preference based on societal factors that each individual has no influence over.

 

Agree also. That is why I think the 10% solution is far better than race based AA. I hope California adopts something like that.

 

This is a public policy question to be debated and decided by the people and their representatives, not Justice Sotomayor.

It's disheartening that people think it's the role of judges to decide whether affirmative action is a good or bad thing.

 

Please highlight where in your previous 4 posts and responses to me where you tried to engage in any sort of discussion?
Thank you,

You also have not offered any solutions of your own. Okay you highlighted income disparity and whine about 50 years of oppression. Have you ever thought maybe those programs you hold so dear is what's causing and compounding the issue further? Instead of working hard and getting out of their current situation, people just want a free hand out. Instead of focussing on studying and bettering themselves, people are too concerend about injustices and they spend all their time fighting for more welfare and AA laws. There are plenty of people, families, and children who came into this country far worse off and through hardwork have found success.

Yes, depending on how wealthy you are you may have certain advantages but how is AA with a race based system addressing that issue at all? Have you ever thought maybe it has nothing to do with the color of your skin? Certain cultures focus on the importance of higher education whilte others clearly do not. Many asian minorities who have found incredible success and broken the income disparity issues you are referring to despite many coming into this country with nothing but the clothes on their backs.

Again not saying the above is 100% true since there are certainly are plenty of examples where people have found TRUE success through hardwork without the aid of crap programs like AA.

 

Trust me bro, I can read just fine. You seem to have some problems with extrapolating and thinking critically. Of course the ruling wasn't anti-AA as a concept, but the practical effect of the ruling is anti-AA. What do you think will happen when people around the nation see various states banning affirmative action through state legislation or referendums and the SCOTUS doing nothing to stop them? I'll give you a hint, check public opinion polls on affirmative action. Many legal experts saw this case as the last chance for the SCOTUS to stop state-based undermining of affirmative action, which has already happened in a lot of states and will probably happen in more after this ruling. Unlike you, I'm sure Breyer, a typically left-leaning judge, was aware of the consequences of his voting, yet he couldn't make himself vote with the other liberal judges, even though it wouldn't have mattered in the end.

 

How many times does it have to be repeated? UC schools do use economic status as a factor in admissions.

 

Are the two mutually exclusive? Why would it be either or?

The goal of a university should be to admit the most qualified students while providing it's students the best education possible. In other words, the priority should be to get the best inputs while striving for the best outputs.

If Harvard is known as a top medical school I only want the brightest, smartest, most qualified candidates to be accepted. It's obviously known as the best program for a reason. Why would you want someone who isnt or less qualified to accepted?

 

as PIRC1 already stated this is completely untrue. When I was in highschool (California) study guides, and several publications regarding minimum requirements/test scores to get into the top UC schools/Programs clearly outlined different standards based on race. For example (not based on real numbers, but charts like these were fairly common prior to getting rid of AA in 96)
Example Avg Admission Requirements/Scores for Top University (again figures not based on any real facts but only serving as an example)
Whites - 1300 SAT 4.1 GPA
Asians - 1350 SAT 4.4 GPA
Latinos - 900 SAT 3.8 GPA
Blacks - 800 SAT 3.4 GPA

So how can you argue the above is fair? When you are juding people on different standards simply based on their ethnicity. It certainly does not admit the most well qualified students. Since getting rid of AA in California I would agree that enrollment and acceptance rates at the top UC's for African Americans and Latino's have plummeted in the engineering/science fields. But this is only because they are accepting the most qualified students. For your example on students that have done well and exceled in math and science.. Well guess what? if they are really qualified they will still get in to the programs of their choice reagardless of their ethnicity.

 

Easy on the name calling. You guys both have a point to make, and these points have been made plenty on the ground for this fight in CA already.

What you both fail to understand is the merit of the other perspective. You know why? It's because of who you are, not what you believe in. In fact, perfectly logical and educated people can have opposite political and social believes based on their background and interest, and they then use all their education and logic to reinforce their beliefs.

Based on what you wrote, I can probably guess which race you belong to pretty accurately. And based on what SunsRocketsfan said, I know what race he is too. You both have dogs in the fight, so stop the name calling.

Even if you don't, please understand that other people and their families will be affected either very positively or very negatively by the outcome of this battle. If you have to tell your kids that they won't get in the school because of their skin color, even if they work hard for it, you would be pissed off too.