The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Given the same applicant scores/backgrounds, blacks 5x as likely to get admitted to Ivies as whites
Zhang Fei    10/12/2009 7:50:08 AM
link
(Quote)
A recent study of the applicants to seven elite colleges in 1997 found that Asian students were much more likely to be rejected than seemingly similar students of other races. Also, athletes and students from top high schools had admissions edges, as did low-income African-Americans and Hispanics.

Translating the advantages into SAT scores, study author Thomas Espenshade, a Princeton sociologist, calculated that African-Americans who achieved 1150 scores on the two original SAT tests had the same chances of getting accepted to top private colleges in 1997 as whites who scored 1460s and Asians who scored perfect 1600s.

He also found some indications that while rich students make up an increasingly large share of the entering freshman classes, the top private schools appeared to be giving admissions edges to low-income minorities, but not necessarily low-income white students. The very richest students also generally had lower acceptance rates than similarly qualified, but less wealthy, students.

Espenshade warned against concluding that his study proved that colleges improperly discriminated. For one thing, Asians, who make up less than 5 percent of the U.S. population, often make up nearly a third of the applicant pools to elite colleges. And they generally account for at least 10 percent of the student body. Meanwhile, low-income students and minorities make up disproportionately smaller shares of the applicant pools and, often, student populations. Harvard reported last year, for example, that 15 percent of its undergraduates were Asian, but only 7 percent were black, and just 6 percent were Hispanic.

In addition, Espenshade's study didn't account for "soft" qualifications such as essays, recommendations, extracurricular activities, musical or artistic talents, or community service, all of which play important roles in admissions decisions.

Nevertheless, some experts said Espenshade's findings seem likely to add more fuel to long-running criticisms of admissions offices. Even though the study reflects 12-year-old practices, "I have no doubt that circumstances have not changed in the interval between then and now," said Ward Connerly, who has spearheaded anti-affirmative action drives in several states. Connerly and other observers noted that college admissions policies have been controversial for decades.

During the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries, African-Americans, American Indians, Jews, and other minorities were barred or severely restricted from many colleges. Civil rights laws and court rulings banned discrimination and encouraged colleges to reach out to long-disadvantaged students.

Some of those efforts created resentment among white and Asian students who felt they were denied opportunities to make room for those whom they believed to be less qualified minorities. Sparked by a lawsuit filed by a white applicant who had been rejected from a medical school, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1978 ruled that racial quotas were illegal. Voters in California, Michigan, and Washington have since voted to ban many affirmative action practices. In recent years, Asian-Americans have fought admissions policies they believe artificially limited their numbers on campuses. In 2006, an Asian student who scored a perfect 2400 on the three SAT tests filed a federal complaint against Princeton alleging the university rejected him because of anti-Asian bias. The U.S. Department of Education is now examining Princeton's admissions policies.

Although the schools Espenshade studied have not been identified, Princeton says it wasn't part of the set. And it says it doesn't discriminate on the basis of race or national origin. "The class of 2010 had a record 17,564 applicants for a class of 1,231. We admitted only about half of all the applicants with maximum 2400 SAT scores," says university spokeswoman Cass Cliatt. "Princeton considers factors such as interest in and demonstrated commitment to a particular field of study or extracurricular activity, exceptional skills and talents, experiences and background, status as an alumni child or Princeton faculty or staff child, athletic achievement, musical or artistic talent, geographic or socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, any unique circumstances, and a range of other factors," she added. Currently, Asians make up 15 percent of Princeton's undergraduate student body.

Mitchell Chang, a professor of higher education at UCLA, said Asians have long complained about the "penalty" they face when applying to colleges. But Espenshade's documentation of a threefold difference for similarly qualified students at elite private universities "is stunning. Really worrisome." Chang said Asian students might be disproportionately less likely to participate in certain kinds of extracurricular activities and that many Asian parents push their children to apply to famous "brand name" elite schools. But he insisted that the Asian applicant pool is nevertheless diverse. He fears that college admissions officers might be stereotyping Asians and saying to themselves: "'We don't want another academic nerd.' "

Deborah Santiago, vice president for policy and research at Excelencia in Education, noted, however, that other recent studies have shown that many well-qualified students who come from low-income, African-American, or Hispanic families don't apply to elite schools. So the few who do apply are likely to have better odds.

Espenshade's research indicates that eliminating affirmative action policies would most likely reduce the number of Hispanic and African-American students and racial diversity on campuses. Some schools that have eliminated affirmative action policies have seen significant changes in their student demographics. At UC-Berkeley, for example, 42 percent of undergraduates are Asian. Fewer than one third are white. While African-Americans make up 14 percent of the general population in Michigan, they account for only 6 percent of the undergraduates at the University of Michigan.

Espenshade found that when comparing applicants with similar grades, scores, athletic qualifications, and family history for seven elite private colleges and universities:

* Whites were three times as likely to get fat envelopes as Asians.
* Hispanics were twice as likely to win admission as whites.
* African-Americans were at least five times as likely to be accepted as whites.
* Athletes were more than twice as likely to get in as non-athletes with similar qualifications.
* Students from .private high schools were twice as likely to receive acceptance letters as similar students from regular public high schools.
* Students from highly regarded public and private high schools were three times as likely to win admission as others.
* Students in the top 10 percent of their high school classes were about twice as likely to get in as students in the next 10 percent.
(Unquote)
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

VelocityVector       10/12/2009 3:00:26 PM

IMHO without a doubt there is active racial discrimination against U.S. students from asian backgrounds.  Though interestingly students who are citizens of asian countries may experience less of it.  I've actually heard this from more than one law school admissions officer.  A rationale advanced was that while such candidates were mechanically sound, they lacked "passion" for the profession, whatever the heck that means.  An admissions officer from a top ten law school has told me that if only grades and scores were counted, her entering law school class would comprise 80% asian females.  I served as a junior member of the hiring committees for two mid- to large size law firms.  Twice and by happenstance my leading candidates were males of korean ethnicity who had perfect SAT and LSAT scores, nearly perfect undergrad and law school grades, the requisite law school fluff activities, and, surprisingly with all that, fantastic social skills and humor on exhibition during the interviews.  I wanted to practice law with these guys.  But twice again an old white male partner sat in my office and told me bluntly, and possibly illegally, that who we were really looking for was a _________ woman to fill the open FBU slot (Fungible Billing Unit) and that I needed to call my candidate with the bad news.  There is so much more I could offer here, to include affirmative action for the children of wealthy partners, mostly white.  Not trying to stoke fires here, just dragging this complex issue into the sunshine where it belongs beginning with recognition that in at least some cases asians have to show that much more than some others in a game that many believe is not infrequently rigged.  Apparently the rich are protecting their own by chopping out the legs from underneath their children's competition.  0.02

v^2
a true "caucasian" unlike most of you caucasian wannabees ;>)

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       10/12/2009 4:06:15 PM

 Apparently the rich are protecting their own by chopping out the legs from underneath their children's competition.  0.02

v^2

a true "caucasian" unlike most of you caucasian wannabees ;>)


 
No wonder many Chinese immigrant parents tell their children not to go to law school.
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector    Yelli, I think it's not just discrimination   10/12/2009 5:40:01 PM

My personal generalization based on experience, reading and admitted stereotypes is that 1 and 2G asian families tend to direct their kids into roles that will enable the family to receive a slice of american economic pie fairly rapidly.  Law practice in major markets typically requires decades of effort, and luck or connections, simply to earn a high professional wage and even then few obtain true wealth practicing law, ever.  Silky Edwards for example is an exception, not a rule.  A political career, ethically managed, similarly is unlikely to generate appreciable wealth.  Thus asian-americans steer their kids into technical fields that permit them to jump onto the business side quickly and then build and sell better mouse traps rather than regulating mouse traps or advising how to get around mouse trap regulations, which is indirect opportunism and perhaps parasitism in some form.  To a certain extent then asian families self-select.  Frankly, I wouldn't recommend law as a vocation in the U.S. to anybody; however, I do believe that access should be equally available for all and that we as a society should not impose quotas for entry except possibly at the bare level necessary to redress the effects of slavery and jim crow, which is a unique situation.  As I said above, if the criteria were purely objective, at least one top tier school entering class would comprise ~80% asian female based on what I was told off the record.  Those not making the cut would presumably consist of majority white and hispanic given population numbers relative to asian-americans.  0.02

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       10/12/2009 6:01:00 PM

 As I said above, if the criteria were purely objective, at least one top tier school entering class would comprise ~80% asian female based on what I was told off the record.  Those not making the cut would presumably consist of majority white and hispanic given population numbers relative to asian-americans.  0.02


v^2



Thanks V^2 for your excellent perspective. I do have a relative who can't get into top medical school because he isn't good enough being Asian American. He instead went to a mediocre one and is driving a 350Z today. In the end, capable people find their ways out of poverty then into success.
 
However, my instinct tells me that 80% Asian female in top law schools will be a great horror movie material. Trust me, you don't want to see that. But, then again, those Asian female may transfer themselves to where male while law students from rich families are. I don't know nothin' about law, but I guess it's better to have more colors in law than white and yellow.
 
Somehow I still don't understand what made William Ayers eligible to be a professor in education in UIC?
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       10/12/2009 6:50:58 PM

FWIW I earned a grad degree in straight c.s.  Several of my classmates in that program were board certified medical doctors.  They were there not to finish but to learn the elements of good system and software design so they could cash-in by developing successful companies in the lucrative medical IT market.  All of them who I recall were asian or middle eastern nationals or early generation.  I have a frat brother, son of a famous cardio surgeon and a white guy, who did two tours at Mass Gen and was on the Harvard Med faculty.  He later went back and picked up a Harvard mba and now serves as c-level with a major medical equipment co.  These examples may be symptomatic of a decline in appreciation for, and recognition of problems that exist in, the so-called learned professions.  More specifically, it's become a b*tch nowadays to earn a secure living in them, as the old pharts sell-out or capitalize on the younger generations in creative, empowered ways that diminish the notion of profession.  As for Ayres, he was a connected leftist with solid academic skills, apparently, who would have been perceived as bringing "passion" to education.  He would have been academy's poster child back in the day when he applied for admission, what with all that passion his future colleagues so love.  0.02

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       10/12/2009 9:52:08 PM
Hmm.  So if the powers at be at my college complain about my lack of passion (not likely, since when I'm teaching history I make Glenn Beck look tame), I'll form a terrorist group and blow up a few buildings.  Sounds fair.
 
V2, I agree with you mostly, but if we're going to have affirmative action to make up for slavery and Jim Crow, then what about all the anti-Chinese prejudice that was present in 19th Century America as well?
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector    sentinel   10/12/2009 11:09:57 PM

My suggestions about ayers were tongue in cheek as I will suppose your quips were.  I call "zingers."

If steps are required to elevate the numbers of americans from chinese ethnic backgrounds into university or vocational roles in proportion with their population, given historical discrimination, then tell us what you think we should do to achieve this.  Quotas for example, is that a part of your affirmative action plans for chinese?  I'm open to ideas.

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd    SSDD   10/13/2009 6:05:27 AM

You can probably find a report written 30 years ago that says exactly the same thing. -- Nothing has changed.

 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       10/13/2009 3:08:49 PM
I was being very tongue in cheek, V2.  On both points.  The people who passed anti-Chinese laws are long dead; the people who were affected by them are too.  So there should be no special treatment for the present generation just because past ones did stupid things. 
 
Otherwise I want some special treatment. Catholic Irishmen weren't exactly welcome in the 1840s when my family got off the boat.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Zhang Fei       10/13/2009 7:18:45 PM
I don't see discrimination against the able ending anytime soon. After all, the American people just produced the first affirmative action president just under a year ago. This is after affirmative action undergrad and grad degrees. These systematically discriminatory policies are why blacks will forever vote Democratic until the GOP also embraces discrimination in favor of blacks.
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       10/13/2009 9:07:55 PM

I don't see discrimination against the able ending anytime soon. After all, the American people just produced the first affirmative action president just under a year ago. This is after affirmative action undergrad and grad degrees. These systematically discriminatory policies are why blacks will forever vote Democratic until the GOP also embraces discrimination in favor of blacks.

300 years continuous of being shut out from practically any meaningful engagement within the most successful, wealthy construct in human history, treated like animals or worse, while retaining dignity, genius and sense of self-worth despite the losses of misappropriation and blood and sufferings from false promises only has made black americans stronger in important respects than practically any other kind here.  We absolutely need the contributions of this population if we are going to move the ball forward as a nation.  One does not simply press a button and expect instant alignment because that utterly ignores three centuries.  I have been hampered by affirmative action at times and despise it's execution majority of times but can one of you propose an alternative remedy that is reasonably calculated to placed blacks to where they should have been had the stated purposes of our founding forebearers been fulfilled?  And for the record I consider myself slightly to the right of center in terms of national politics.  Yet I voted for this President and am experiencing tremendous buyer's remorse on some issues.  Let's hear from you.

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       10/14/2009 1:21:28 AM
Silly me. This was V^2 was talking about:
 
 
Quote    Reply

buzzard       10/14/2009 11:34:17 AM
300 years continuous of being shut out from practically any meaningful engagement within the most successful, wealthy construct in human history, treated like animals or worse, while retaining dignity, genius and sense of self-worth despite the losses of misappropriation and blood and sufferings from false promises only has made black americans stronger in important respects than practically any other kind here.  We absolutely need the contributions of this population if we are going to move the ball forward as a nation.  One does not simply press a button and expect instant alignment because that utterly ignores three centuries.
 
 I have a number of issues here:
A) Basing social policy on past grievances doesn't do anyone a jot of good. You screw over someone now for something their forefather did to someone else's forefather, and you are just causing a new set of grievances.  In fact you also make a business out of grievances. Look at that chump Gates. This is a man at the height of privilege, and he got in a tussle with a cop who was trying to watch out for his property, and then claims the cop is a racist troglodyte and is in the wrong. What a load of hogwash. The notion of making up for past wrongs is all well and good, but unintended consequences end up ruling the roost, and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
 
B) If we are going to go all out to remedy past wrongs, where do we draw the line? Pick an ethic group in the U.S. besides the initial WASP settlers and you can find a host of grievances worthy of remedy. The railroads were built on the bodies of the Chinese and Irish. The Italians didn't go into crime because opportunity was beating down their door. The amount of unforgivable treatment meted out to the American Indian could be listed extensively.  How do we measure this? Are we going to play family tree games like in old Apartheid South Africa and design a system where your race decides your spoils? Are you black enough if you come to the U.S. from Africa, without any history of slavery? Do you still get spoils then? What fraction of my background has to be Native American before I get goodies? The owners of the most lucrative casinos(on a reservation) are from a tribe that miraculously re-appeared once casino gambling became the thing. What if I'm half black, I guess I'm all black then because I can get freebies?  I'm personally half hispanic (as if that means anything). I assiduously avoided ever listing it on applications for any admissions or benefits. I'll succeed or fail on my own.
 
 C) Then we get to really what matters, what is the actual impact of the legs up. Does a system like affirmative action actually benefit the recipients? While it has provided more lucrative positions by the force of law, has it actually lifted  people up over the generations (we're at least one or two in now)? Or has it actually created a system of diminished expectations and unmentioned disdain?
 
 
At the end of the day Affirmative Action has existed for almost forty years now. That's a pretty long time. Doesn't have to have an expiration date? Even if it did have positive effects (which I would dispute), don't you have to shut it off due to the negative effects eventually? If one has made the case that there were needed positive effects, didn't they actually do something permanent, or is the remedy just a band aid rather than a cure?
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy