[FEDERALIST] If We’re Going To Have A Racial Double Standard It Should Be About Black Americans Only

Huh?

So I guess colleges should ignore the actions of prospective students.

The guy robbed a store? So what! Good scores, come on in!
The guy was arrested for selling weed at school? Who cares! Good scores! Come on in!

And WTF do you even mean by an immutable characteristic? If your immutable characteristic is violence then guess what? Schools like Stanford can pass on you for someone that has good scores and wasn't violent. I can't believe this is an argument you guys are going with it.

 

My argument is that 1% is too high if they were admitted with inferior academic credentials. I said from the start that I don't care if 100% of the school is Asian if they are the best applicants. I support merit based admissions, not discrimination for the sake of diversity. If you didn't earn it with academic achievement, you don't deserve it simply because you look different than those who did earn it.

College in general, no, but they are being denied to specific schools based on the color of their skin or their racial and ethnic background.....and in case I have to spell it out, that's wrong.

Again, you are supporting literally racist policy and there's no chance whatsoever that you'd support it if those who benefited were swapped with those who were being discriminated against. Your opinion is 100% based on the outcome being one you approve of.

That's not an "assumption" that's what the numbers say. Black students perform the worst on tests such as the ACT or the SAT and in the studies that are done are admitted to college with lower GPA's and worse test scores than any other group based on diversity quotas. Again, the facts are not racist. The policies that lead to these kinds of racial and ethnic quotas are. There have been many studies done on this, hence the lawsuit against Harvard.

When it happens, I'm against it. Unfortunately, most of the time it is people crying wolf or looking for excuses. If there was a situation where equally qualified or better qualified black people were refused employment or acceptance to schools based on some kind of "personality test" then I'd speak against it. Again, I'm for meritocracy, I want the best to benefit no matter who they are and I never want to prop up those who don't deserve it. The world benefits from meritocracy while artificially propping up inferiors over more deserving people for any reason makes the world poorer.

Their argument was that Affirmative Action is important, not that they disagreed that the practice was discriminatory. Essentially they support the outcome, thus they'll support the racist measures it takes to get that outcome.

 

in ME , Sudaneses in general and Hausa (Hawswai) immegrants are an example of honestly,good manners, politeness,(insert any positive human quality), a pleasure to deal with..and they're climbing to the top social- economical ladder as well

Google : Dr. Hawswai and see your self,

I think AA or anyone else ,needs a fair opportunity in a decent incubation environment to succeed

 

It's not up for you to judge their academic credentials.

Should LiAngelo Ball had gone to Duke or UNC? Look at his high school stats and tell me he shouldn't have. You see why the argument you are making is not very sound? We don't judge people solely on tests and numbers.

The problem with this argument is that you are essentially accepting that a school like Harvard could be 100% anything and that we should just accept that and accept that no one else was deserving...all based on test scores...test scores mind you that fluctuate and are not completely reliable.

It's no wonder that the main proponent of this argument is brought forth from White conservatives who are concerned that schools like Harvard have a shrinking white demographic. They'd love to go back to a time where these schools could be 95% white.

This has not been proven at all, it was brought before the SCOTUS multiple times and has still not been proven. An organization made of a coalition of Asian American organizations looked at the data...and still reached a different conclusion.

This has not been proven at all, it was brought before the SCOTUS multiple times and has still not been proven. An organization made of a coalition of Asian American organizations looked at the data...and still reached a different conclusion.

No, the numbers say on average that the test scores are lower, that's it. It says nothing about diversity quotas. You are calling them inferior students based on test scores, test scores again that fluctuate. A student can score differently on the same test.

By the way, Harvard denies it, so now it is on you to prove it. Prove it.

Yes, like the time Scalia, a SCOTUS Judge, suggested that blacks should go on a slower learning track, remember that?

Thankfully this isn't happening. Colleges have a holistic approach to admissions, as explained, and rightfully so. I'd love to argue holistic review versus tests, as that's what the argument should be about and not about race at all, and if colleges should be more transparent in their admissions...

I think a holistic review should remain and I think AA should remain as a check, a regulation, to ensure that we don't have minorities kept out of elite colleges again when they have proven that they belong and can graduate just as well.


By the way, this is from the government...the OCR, Office For Civil Rights, a branch of US Department of Education...
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/02086002-a.pdf

I have to bold and underline it so that you won't just ignore it.

As you can see, the crux of the debate is that you think colleges should change their entire admissions process to only consider scores...

I'm not sure how you would suggest they do this? Would you then force colleges to take students based on their test scores and GPAs?
Let's scroll down just a pinch...

Interesting. I'm sure you have contradicting information though. I'm interested in seeing it.

 

But they aren't better qualified in all areas of admission only in testing or the areas that you chose.

It does matter if the people they select graduate. That shows that they selected people who were qualified and were able to meet the criteria before them. The students they judged that were qualified to get into the University proved the admission people were correct because they were successful at the University. It is strange that you don't think being successful in college is a good test that the people were a good fit for the college.

Also, the white and Asian students at the University get benefit from working and learning beside people from different communities, cultures, and backgrounds with many different experiences. It is valuable for all of those involved.

 

Why would there be anything wrong with it inherently? If 100% of the best candidates were black, the school should only admit those students. Why admit less deserving students based on the color of their skin?

This logically makes no sense at all unles sin your mind Asians are white. If admitted only on the basis of merit, Asians would make up the majority at schools like Harvard, not white people....I'm not sure if you were paying attention, but white people get an advantage over Asians when it comes to being admitted to Harvard and other schools as well, it's just not as pronounced as the advantages that black or Hispanic students get.

The conclusion that they reached was that they support Affirmative Action, which means that they support the discrimination because they support the goals of the discrimination.

Not just a little bit lower, 450 points on average lower just to get equal consideration....but sure just waive that away as if it's not a big deal or that you'd accept it if it were reversed.

You say that there's no evidence that certain schools have "quotas" for Asian students, but here's a fun chart showing the Asian enrollment at several schools accused of having quotas and one that is well known for not having Asian quotas.

Note that over the time period in the chart below, the college age Asian population doubles and Asian SAT and ACT scores significantly increase on average over that period of time




So how do you explain that? There are twice as many Asian students that are doing even better academically....and yet at schools accused of having quotas the percentage remains about the same and in some cases there seems to have been a sharp decline after hitting above 20% that never recovered. Yet at CatTech, a school well known for NOT having Asian quotas, the enrollment doubled just like the college aged Asian population did. Funny how that happens.

Honestly man, there's no way you can pretend this isn't happening. Again, just say that you support the discrimination because you support the end goal if that's how you feel.

 

Because they aren't less deserving at all, you are calling them that, the Universities disagree. Not only that, they graduate, which says that they were plenty deserving.

How do YOU define merit? You are defining it differently from the universities.

It's also odd that the people pushing it never complain about legacies. You know, the students that get in thanks to having rich families? You realize how many of them get into schools? I don't know, it's just odd how the anti-AA crowd never brings them up...

Again, the Department of Education disagreed, you ignored this.

The funny thing about said study is that the creators disagree with the conclusion that conservatives took from it and are for Affirmative Action.

http://reappropriate.co/2015/05/espenshade-data-are-not-proof-of-anti-asian-discrimination-edu4all/

So the data you are using you don't even understand it. This is how we get talking points like this, twisted facts and data.

Now, since unlike you, I will address the data you brought forth and not just ignore it but counter it.

As mentioned above, EACH college has their own admissions policy, their own rules. Showing that one school has more Asians than another is proof of nothing other than the fact that one school has more Asian students than another. Also, that is a public school and thus has to follow certain rules that a school like Harvard doesn't. That's literally all it proves. It doesn't prove that Harvard is denying students because of their race.

Wait. You mean there is no way I could...I don't understand why you'd think that. The SCOTUS ruled in favor of it in 2003 and in 2016. Many Asians have been polled and favor AA, the US Department of Justice is saying exactly what I'm saying, that it isn't discrimination. I'm still confused about this malicious end goal that I support? You keep bringing it up though.

I mean, you can't even condemn what Scalia said, it's funny how you ignore it every single time and yet you want to act like you aren't anti-black?

 

I know that isn't how admissions work. As I said, there is also a racial preference at work, which is shown by the numbers. There is no way you can avoid that conclusion when evidence abounds that year after year there are admissions of black and Latinx students with significantly lower test scores than white and Asian students. It can't be that the school doesn't care about test scores, because the test scores are a huge factor in the admission of white and Asian students. If you are Chinese and want to go to Harvard, but your Math score on the SAT was in the 550 range, you may as well just not even send in an application.

That would only be true if we assume that all of the rejected students who scored higher would not have succeeded. I make no such assumption, nor should you. I assume that an IQ proxy like the SAT is a good predictor of academic success (as it has been proven to be, in fact one of the best predictors) and thus the higher scoring students who were rejected would also have been successful. Therefore, it was not that they managed to pick all of the top prospects and that is borne out by their students' collective success, but rather that the entrance requirements could be significantly relaxed, and they would still have successful students.

To prove your hypothesis of intangible factors boosting the black and Latinx students to the level of their higher scoring white and Asian counterparts, you would have to show that white and Asian students with similar entrance exam scores to the black and Latinx students would fail while attending the institutions. That experiment cannot be run, because white and Asian students with entrance exam scores in line with the admitted black and Latinx averages would never get in (absent perhaps legacies, who also manage to graduate).

Instead, consider that the entrance requirements (at least for whites and Asians) are much more stringent than is necessary to weed out those who would not be successful, and instead are intended to be used as a limiter to admit only those who are among the cream of the crop, essentially increasing the value of a degree from that University, because people understand that graduates were elite going in. If that is the case, there would be no reason to expect someone with a combined SAT of 1800 to fail to graduate, but they are taking a spot from someone with an SAT score of 2080, and seemingly the only reason is skin color.

 

Ah yes, EACH college has their own admissions policy, their own rules, and some of them set quotas for how many Asians they will allow in, just like Harvard had for Jews once upon a time.

Somehow you are looking at the evidence, which is significantly more Asians are applying as their population has doubled, and they are doing better academically, and yet that isn't represented in the admissions at schools with a history of ethnic quotas.....and you still bury your head in the sand because it is socially acceptable racism and you like the results of it. I mean, c'mon man, this is a REALLY bad look. i know we see things very differently politically, but racial discrimination really really should be something we agree on.

 

Look at the post above you and see that test scores and see this...

at Harvard, the gap between average Black and Asian SAT scores is a mere 190 points on a 2400 point scale...

Interesting, so a mere 190 points...The College Board says with tutoring and coaching one can raise their test score by 200 points.

https://www.collegeboard.org/releases/2017/average-score-gains-on-redesigned-sat

You should read the link I posted above, it shows that the study that has been relied on for your argument isn't arguing what you think you're arguing and doesn't represent the reality.

Yes, but again, if the difference between Black and Asian students is 190 then it's a difference that can be made up by tutoring and mentoring. Remember, SAT scores are not static numbers that can never change.

How does that explain the Asian and white kids that get in with lower scores? What's the explanation for that?

 

"The university gave OCR specific examples of Asian-American applicants for the Class of 2010 whose grades and SAT scores were not near the top of the range usually seen by the university’s admissions officers, but who nonetheless were offered admission. These included an Asian-American applicant who had ‘only’ a 3.45 GPA in high school, but who was a nationally recognized athlete; and two other Asian-American applicants with relatively low GPAs and SAT scores who were notable for other distinctions such as community service, overcoming impoverished backgrounds and working in a family business...In sum, OCR found that the University treated each applicant as an individual, without making an applicant’s race or national origin a defining characteristic. Accordingly, OCR found no evidence of the different treatment of Asian applicants."

“I stop short of saying that Asian-American students are being discriminated against in the college application process because we don’t have sufficient empirical evidence to support that claim,” Espenshade said...

Espenshade’s work is not a direct reporting of SAT score disparities at the nation’s select universities. Asian American enrollees are not actually required to score 450 more SAT points than Black enrollees...

at Harvard, the gap between average Black and Asian SAT scores is a mere 190 points on a 2400 point scale...

Espenshade is offering an interpretation of college admissions (from twenty years ago) that he has artificially modeled against an SAT score scale. We can quibble about the modeling, but we should not mistake the model for a direct report of reality: the actual difference in mean SAT scores between White and Asian enrollees at Harvard is similarly negligible...

Espenshade said in an interview that he does not think his data establish this [anti-Asian] bias. He noted that while his formulas are notably more complete than typical test score comparisons by race and ethnicity, he doesn’t have the “softer variables,” such as teacher and high school counselor recommendations, essays and lists of extracurricular activities. It is possible, he said, that such factors explain some of the apparent SAT and ACT disadvantage facing Asian applicants...

“I stop short of saying that Asian-American students are being discriminated against in the college application process because we don’t have sufficient empirical evidence to support that claim,” Espenshade said...

 

The throwing money at it hasn't worked thing isn't true in my view. The funding for children varies wildly from district to district and state to state. Hell, I own a home in Katy and we just built a $70 million football facility. That's a lot of funding that could have gone into actually teaching children and paying teachers.

It's more like a cycle of ignorance and poverty that is never broken because there's nothing in place to break the cycle.

 

And it's sadly even worse. If someone follows the scientific findings in detail these days, you can see epigenetic shadows that last for generations.

So: raised in a poor 'hood and had a stressed single parent of little means? Your grandkids will show the effects of this, biochemically. It's truly f'ed up and runs counter to all Ayn Randian ways of viewing the world. There's not much of a blank slate in this oligarchy, I mean, if we care about the data anyway.

 

One big reason why it is such a difficult issue.

 

190 points is statistically significant. Who cares if tutoring and coaching can raise a score 200 points? Then each of these representative people get tutoring and coaching and the result is once again a 190 point differential.

Yeah, I read the study. Don't you think the people arguing in favor of the current system have an interest in minimizing the disparity?

Wouldn't it only be made up if the black students get tutoring and the Asians do not?

Because one is a statistical average and the other is an anecdote. They admit to "promoting diversity". It isn't like they are trying that hard to pretend there are no racial preferences. Somehow, because they say that they are not discriminatory and oh look here is one Asian that got in with scores comparable to the black average, you ignore the obvious statistical disparities and the fact that they are admittedly relying on Affirmative Action and promoting diversity.

It is simply beyond belief that there is some race neutral criteria that is being used that consistently results in the admission of people of certain races with lower test scores while generally requiring higher test scores of other races. They won't say what their holistic admissions practice is, but they will say they support ethnic diversity and it just so happens that every single year the average scores of the their admittees break down along the same racial lines with Asians at the top, followed by whites, then hispanics, then blacks. Even if they are telling themselves they are not using race, clearly whatever factor they are using is so closely correlated with race as to be a proxy for race.

 

Any good reads on the latest epigenetic studies? The topic intrigues and disturbs me at the same time, though it should make the most sense intuitively.

 

No it is not. Remember the scale discussed there was 2400. If it can be wiped away in a week or two of studying for the test then that is not significant at all.

Who says that the difference isn't 190 because one kid went to a poor school and didn't get tutoring and the other didn't? You're assuming automatically that one kid is just going to score higher regardless?

Well, the thing is, the entire argument is based on Espenshade’s work but the thing is again...his work was never showing that the difference was 450 points, as you and others are arguing in this thread...

So you were willing to use the information from the study then? When you brought up those numbers weren't they from his study...So you must not think it biased now that you know that was never arguing for the point you are making, right? It was taking a general average, not the average for schools like Harvard.

The actual difference found at Harvard was thus 190, a score, that could be raised or lowered within 200 points based on tutoring or coaching or what have you. We know that being nervous before a test could lower your score...among many other things...No wonder then why these schools only put so much stock in test scores.

Another thing too, we actually don't know the average test scores for kids getting into Harvard by demographics, the numbers out there are nationwide and not for each school. I think it's time to just admit that black students attending Harvard also crushed their tests

Again, you are assuming that the Asian students are not getting tutoring and that that isn't the difference already?

I'm merely stating that the difference is a difference that can be made up through tutoring, illustrating that it is not a significant difference. I have no idea who is getting tutored or not, I do know that poor kids from poor neighborhoods are not getting tutoring as that costs money, I do know that.

190 is a small difference that can be made up by variables, so it turns out, the black students that are going to Harvard are also doing extremely well on test but on average score around 8% or so less than Asians...and that's just the average, and that number could be made up in a week of studying with a tutor for the test! One would reasonably assume that some black and hispanic students are scoring closer and that the difference is 150...100...50...whatever it is lower and the admissions officer shrugs and think the difference is negligible and starts to consider other factors.

The thing is there is no proof to say there is discrimination against Asians or anyone at this point and when did diversity become such a dirty word on the right?

As for the bold...isn't that, according to you, how it's supposed to be? I don't see the issue then, they are admitting more Asians than anyone else, so what really is the issue here?

More numbers, Harvard says their average SAT score is 2237 (2017) on the old 2400 scale, lets take away 190 from that, so, that means 2047 for black students, about, right? What % is this, nationally?

http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/SAT-Percentile-Ranks-Composite-CR-M-W-2011.pdf

2011 study, couldn't find anything more recent, but as you can see, this is still putting them in the top 7 percent, nationwide. As I mentioned before, anyone getting invited to these schools is crushing it academically. They are by no means skating by and cruising in, just give them their due.

I think it is time to admit that black kids and hispanic kids that get into Harvard also crushed their tests and not just assuming that they are just there on race but they too are there on merit.

Well, unless they are legacies...which, again, the anti-AA crowd never seems too eager to discuss.

 

Again, no amount of money will replace the automatic advantage enjoyed by any student with a stable household with highly involved parents. I do have to admit the Katy stadium is excessive and serves no purpose in actual education but it was paid for through a bond package that people voted for. The money for the stadium comes entirely from the tax payers within the district and will eventually be paid off. While I admittedly have not looked at any statistics, I am betting there are not a lot children in Katy ISD who are falling behind due to lack of parent involvement. Katy is the epitome of a suburban school district. The problem we are discussing is much more common in inner city schools

 

There is definitely a double-standard when it comes to language. The offspring of uneducated illegal-immigrant onion farmers speak proper American English. However, my time here on Earth has lead me to believe that an overwhelming number of black people simply refuse to learn how to speak modern American English.