4 ms·

> then got scholarships because of only ethnicity. Are you absolutely certain of that? How did you know?

EJTH 10y ago
I am not American. But don't you guys have that "affirmative action" thing, especially for the african american demographic?
- GBond 10y ago
  Most top tier universities don't consider asian-americans as under-represented minorities and even hold higher standards via unwritten caps for the number of AAs admitted.
TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
Generally, under affirmative action programmes and the like, nobody gets anything “just because of their ethnicity”. Rather, they may be given slightly reduced entry requirements, for example, to compensate for their background potentially disadvantaging them.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  1.0 lower on GPA (e.g. 2.5 vs 3.5) is "slightly reduced entry requirements"? http://web.archive.org/web/20080423221308/http://www.umich.edu/~mrev/archives/1999/summer/chart.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20080423221308/http://www.umich.e...
  - rmxt 10y ago
    Surely college admissions procedures have changed significantly in the intervening 17 years, right? We're talking about the advent and removal of the 2400 point SAT, the rise of digital applications, and the rise of SAT subject tests, among other changes. Furthermore, this specific point system in question was ruled unconstitutional and is no longer in use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      It's possible that the same organizations which were found directly discriminating on race, and desperately resist any transparency (both before and after), have secretly reformed. It's also possible that admissions numbers didn't change a lot because "holistic" admissions discovered previously unmeasurable mitigating factors for blacks having low SAT/grades/etc. And in yet another major coincidence, these systems also discovered that Asians are inferior in similarly unquantifiable ways, resulting in Asians who are admitted having SAT scores 450 pts higher than blacks and 140 pts higher than whites. I don't find this particularly likely, however. Do you?
      - burkaman 10y ago
        I don't think it's really a secret, the "unmeasurable mitigating factors" are society-wide discrimination issues that make life in general harder for black people. You don't have to pretend there's a secret conspiracy, affirmative action colleges are openly trying to correct for the effects of structural racism that they have no control over. This is certainly a debatable idea, but you don't need to act like it's something colleges are trying to cover up.
        thaumasiotes 10y ago
        > You don't have to pretend there's a secret conspiracy, affirmative action colleges are openly trying to correct for the effects of structural racism that they have no control over. This is an interesting case. In fact, you do have to admit there's a secret conspiracy, for the simple reason that "correcting for the effects of structural racism" is illegal for public colleges, and they therefore never formally admit to that justification. You're correct, though, that that is how they are generally perceived by the public and how their executives generally think about what they're doing, as far as we can tell. I think that's a pretty good match to the concept of "conspiracy".
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > "correcting for the effects of structural racism" is illegal for public colleges No, its not. Certain mechanisms might be (whether or not they have that purpose), but pursuing that purpose is not.
yummyfajitas 10y ago
One can't be 100% certain of anything. However, between 2/3 and 5/6 of black students at top colleges probably would have been rejected under a meritocratic admission system. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11904256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11904256 Similarly, it's established that Asians tend to meet a much higher SAT cutoff than blacks and whites. http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-american/article-admission.aspx http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-... It's pretty safe to say that most blacks at Harvard don't deserve to be there and it probably should be an Asian in their place. You just can't say which specific blacks and Asians it should be.
- burkaman 10y ago
  I don't think you can jump straight from "some people benefit from affirmative action" to "they don't deserve to be there". Obviously supporters of affirmative action do think they deserve to be there, despite their lower test scores, and it's worth at least considering that point of view.

EJTH 10y ago

I am not American. But don't you guys have that "affirmative action" thing, especially for the african american demographic?

GBond 10y ago
Most top tier universities don't consider asian-americans as under-represented minorities and even hold higher standards via unwritten caps for the number of AAs admitted.

TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago

Generally, under affirmative action programmes and the like, nobody gets anything “just because of their ethnicity”. Rather, they may be given slightly reduced entry requirements, for example, to compensate for their background potentially disadvantaging them.

yummyfajitas 10y ago
1.0 lower on GPA (e.g. 2.5 vs 3.5) is "slightly reduced entry requirements"? http://web.archive.org/web/20080423221308/http://www.umich.edu/~mrev/archives/1999/summer/chart.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20080423221308/http://www.umich.e...
- rmxt 10y ago
  Surely college admissions procedures have changed significantly in the intervening 17 years, right? We're talking about the advent and removal of the 2400 point SAT, the rise of digital applications, and the rise of SAT subject tests, among other changes. Furthermore, this specific point system in question was ruled unconstitutional and is no longer in use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    It's possible that the same organizations which were found directly discriminating on race, and desperately resist any transparency (both before and after), have secretly reformed. It's also possible that admissions numbers didn't change a lot because "holistic" admissions discovered previously unmeasurable mitigating factors for blacks having low SAT/grades/etc. And in yet another major coincidence, these systems also discovered that Asians are inferior in similarly unquantifiable ways, resulting in Asians who are admitted having SAT scores 450 pts higher than blacks and 140 pts higher than whites. I don't find this particularly likely, however. Do you?
    - burkaman 10y ago
      I don't think it's really a secret, the "unmeasurable mitigating factors" are society-wide discrimination issues that make life in general harder for black people. You don't have to pretend there's a secret conspiracy, affirmative action colleges are openly trying to correct for the effects of structural racism that they have no control over. This is certainly a debatable idea, but you don't need to act like it's something colleges are trying to cover up.
      - thaumasiotes 10y ago
        > You don't have to pretend there's a secret conspiracy, affirmative action colleges are openly trying to correct for the effects of structural racism that they have no control over. This is an interesting case. In fact, you do have to admit there's a secret conspiracy, for the simple reason that "correcting for the effects of structural racism" is illegal for public colleges, and they therefore never formally admit to that justification. You're correct, though, that that is how they are generally perceived by the public and how their executives generally think about what they're doing, as far as we can tell. I think that's a pretty good match to the concept of "conspiracy".
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > "correcting for the effects of structural racism" is illegal for public colleges No, its not. Certain mechanisms might be (whether or not they have that purpose), but pursuing that purpose is not.

yummyfajitas 10y ago

One can't be 100% certain of anything. However, between 2/3 and 5/6 of black students at top colleges probably would have been rejected under a meritocratic admission system. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11904256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11904256 Similarly, it's established that Asians tend to meet a much higher SAT cutoff than blacks and whites. http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-american/article-admission.aspx http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-... It's pretty safe to say that most blacks at Harvard don't deserve to be there and it probably should be an Asian in their place. You just can't say which specific blacks and Asians it should be.

burkaman 10y ago
I don't think you can jump straight from "some people benefit from affirmative action" to "they don't deserve to be there". Obviously supporters of affirmative action do think they deserve to be there, despite their lower test scores, and it's worth at least considering that point of view.