Touche, Hayes. In any event I believe I got my point across. Discrimination is wrong regardless if it is used to make up for past acts of discrimination.
i'm sorry..this is just funny!!! do you think i wake up in the morning with you on my mind?? or these arguments on my mind?? my silence is notable....ummmm...my job is my important than answering your theoretical question. sorry for the delay... define "the problem" for me.
Why is it important that college enrollment numbers follow the same demographics as state population? Shouldn't the best and the brightest take up the spaces available in college classes? Are the people in the top ten percent of their high-school classes not representative of this group? If college enrollment demographics are very close to the top performers in high school, yet people insist that they should be representative of state population demographics, then it seems that descrimination is precisely the goal of those who want the system to change, that lesser students should be accepted over greater ones, simply based on the color of their skin.
I would think the thought would be that if everyone is roughly equal, then the college enrollment numbers should be roughly equal to the state population breakdown. This does ignore things like minorities being overrepresented in poverty figures, etc. I know there are those who are guaranteed admission to Texas colleges through the Top 10% who cannot attend because of their financial situation or because of their family situation. Another thing it ignores is that there are some colleges that are more geared toward minorities. For example, enrollment at traditionally black colleges in Texas has been rising relatively fast in the last year or two. It may be that, for whatever reason, an African-American student is more compelled in some cases to attend a traditionally black college. Or circumstances may lead a student to attend a college other than the flagship universities. Maybe cost considerations or family considerations end up pushing an hispanic student toward a Dallas County Community College in his neighborhood rather than to UT comig out of high school, etc. Looking at college enrollment overall instead of just at UT-Austin or any one institution, we see that 23% of college enrollment is Hispanic and 10% is African-American. With a state population that's 30% Hispanic and 10% African-American, we see that, as a state, we're not seeing that large of a variation between college enrollment overall and state population overall, according to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Here's a snippet from a Washington Post article that talks about some of the problems: After the initial, sharp drop in minority enrollment (at the University of Texas - Austin) following the appeals court's decision, the 10 percent law has helped the numbers of African American and Hispanic freshmen recover approximately to their previous levels. More than 14 percent of this year's entering class is Hispanic; about 3.5 percent is black. Still, those numbers fall well short of the overall minority population in Texas, which is about 30 percent Hispanic and 12 percent black. The primary beneficiary of the new rule has been Asian Americans, who are enrolling at UT-Austin and other state-supported schools at levels disproportionate to their numbers in the state. Of this year's freshman class at UT-Austin, nearly 15 percent are Asian Americans, although they constitute scarcely 2.7 percent of the state's population. University officials acknowledge they have failed to attract anything approaching representative numbers of blacks and other groups that have traditionally not produced college-bound students. About 700 high schools across the state, many of them predominantly minority, are still not sending any graduating seniors to UT-Austin. And many black graduates, including those at the top of their class and automatically eligible for admission, don't even apply to state-funded universities in Texas. At L.G. Pinkston High School in Dallas, split almost evenly between African Americans and Hispanics, nearly a third of the graduates go on to college, but very few of the blacks go to state-supported colleges and virtually none go to the best of them, UT-Austin. The principal, J. Leonard Wright, has nudged the best students toward higher education by introducing advanced placement classes and free college test preparation courses. But he said he urges the cream of the crop to go to traditionally black colleges, where he believes they will feel more comfortable than at the predominantly white University of Texas. Undric Hamilton, a black senior at Pinkston near the top of his class, picked up on that theme. He plans to go to college, but not UT. Black students "feel more comfortable" at traditionally black schools, he said. "I'd rather be a name than a number." "We haven't solved that," said Bruce Walker, admissions director for UT-Austin, which received about 22,000 applications last year for its freshman class of nearly 8,000. He said one group excluded in many instances by the law is blacks from middle-class and suburban high schools ranked just below the highest 10 percent of their class. Before the federal appellate court decision, the university's affirmative action policy allowed for those students to be admitted. Now, Walker said, "that's the group we're missing." In some cases, top minority students never consider going to college. In other cases, tuition and fees -- even the $40 application fee -- are just too high. To sweep in promising minority students, the university has taken steps that seem a lot like affirmative action, albeit under a different name. The full scholarship Longhorn Scholars program targets 70 low-income high schools whose graduates have not attended UT-Austin in the past; about 85 percent of the Longhorn Scholars are black or Hispanic. All 300 Longhorn Scholars in this year's freshman class are top 10 percenters, but their average combined SAT scores are around 900, about 200 points below the average of other freshmen. Yet with extensive help from the university -- special counseling and mentoring programs, classes with top professors, interdisciplinary courses -- Longhorn students are performing as well as and in many cases better than their classmates. "These kids are in very rough classes, but they're getting lots of guidance and support," said Lucia Gilbert, vice provost in charge of the program. Other university officials have pronounced themselves more or less satisfied with the new system, while continuing to rue the passing of affirmative action. "There's no perfect admissions system," said Yudof, the chancellor. "But 10 percent is pretty good."
Just curious, for those who are against considering race/ethnicity in college admissions, period, are you..... OK with scholarships and other supports structures targeting getting ethnic/racial minorities through college once they are there? (yes/no) OK with using class (e.g., based on something like if neither your parents had a college degree or it can be shown you came from poverty) as a factor in admissions?(yes, no) OK with scholarships and other supports structures targeting getting those from lower class backgrounds through college? (yes/no)
I'd rather see scholarships based on either need or achievement (or both). But support structures that help ease the transition for minorities from being in a majority-minority neighborhood or high school to a majority-white college campus, etc. is nothing I would have a problem with. I'm okay with using socioeconomic factors in considering admissions. I'm cool with that, too. These being said, of course, I don't completely disagree with race being used as a factor for admissions in some cases. A system like the UGA system I described earlier in this thread seemed okay to me. And beyond these things, I think colleges and universities should (if they aren't already) participate in outreach programs that encourage minority or economically disadvantanged students to attend their universities. There are many forms these outreach programs could take. It may well be that if the University of Texas came to students in the 9th grade and gave them something to strive for, there would be, four years later, a larger percentage of those students who would be applying and having the qualifications to attend the school. If that makes any sense at all.
as an aside, one that's probably been put forth by other people... why are there black colleges? in what sorts of subject matter do black colleges excel? i ask b/c minorities are underrepresented in the sciences. it seems to me that the math/geology/biology/chemistry departments in black colleges would suck, since real research universities have a hard enough time employing minorities in their programs... and research universities certainly have the ability to outbid little schools. this doesn't seem to make any sense to me. are there a lot of black colleges? or are they relegated to weirdo land like all girl colleges (sweet briar, etc.).
--Perfect sense. I just wonder if there are folks who are against all three things I mentioned. It seems to me Stupid Moniker would be against all 3. Nothing wrong with that, it is philosophically consistent, I just don't think it is very popular. What gets me is the critics (e.g., in California) against admission policies that use social class considerations or local school district considerations (like the 10% rule) because they end up producing demographics not so dissimilar to what occurred before the race/ethnic affirmative action policies were removed. Well duh!!! Then you see these folks say they are really fighting reverse discrimination by being against these new class-based, de facto racially correlated, policies when it is clear they really just don't think race, class or any other factors outside of test scores/GPA/HS-AP classes should be considered at all. They won't come out and spell this out however because I think the vast majority of people view this as favoring the already advantaged and not doing reasonably measures to help the disadvantaged that many people agree with in spirit. I would say it is like social Darwinism in the extreme except that in true Darwinism the weak of the affluent would not have such protection and get eaten like all the other weak.
In turn...yes, no, yes. Most scholarships are handed out by private orgs. I think it is wonderful thing that these orgs have need based scholarships...and scholarships targeted to their racial/ethnic groups. I did notice that nobody has a scholarship fir middle class white guys. I wonder why that is. I grew up in a good neighborhood and all...but my dad was FAR from loaded. I looked for HOURS at every scholarship program I could find and there was nothing I could even apply for. Can anybody say why that is? Anyway...DS...in response to your question I have no problem with minority scholarships (although I'd like equal time) or need based scholarships. I just don't think it is fair to ANYBODY to consider those things for admissions.
Just curious, for those who are against considering race/ethnicity in college admissions, period, are you..... OK with scholarships and other supports structures targeting getting ethnic/racial minorities through college once they are there? (yes/no) Against, no one should get special treatment because of their race, white or otherwise. OK with using class (e.g., based on something like if neither your parents had a college degree or it can be shown you came from poverty) as a factor in admissions?(yes, no) Against, the people who are admitted to college should be those who have the best academic record. OK with scholarships and other supports structures targeting getting those from lower class backgrounds through college? (yes/no) For. I do not think that not being able to afford education should keep anyone from receiving it, given that they are academically qualified.
i could be wrong...but i think he's talking about scholarships offered by PRIVATE groups....not public.
