4 ms·

Well, if minorities are being positively affected, then majorities (in this case, Asians + whites) must be negatively affected. How is that novel? The effect i

Well, if minorities are being positively affected, then majorities (in this case, Asians + whites) must be negatively affected. How is that novel? The effect is the same as ever, whoever is part of the majority takes the hit.

esrauch 13y ago
If white and Asian students are the majority, they should be selected against based on their proportion of that majority. I believe some are suggesting that Asian students are being unduly discriminated against when compared to white students.
asdfologist 13y ago
You don't get it - the parent's point is that your argument doesn't explain why Asians take a much bigger hit than whites. "Asian applicants have 67% lower odds of admission than white applicants with comparable test scores."
- wfunction 13y ago
  What's the Asian to White ratio of qualified college applicants? i.e. are there more Whites or Asians who would be accepted based on factors other than their race? If it's > 1, then obviously Asians will take a bigger hit, since they're the majority, that's the whole point of my comment. If it's <= 1 though then yes, the situation is very interesting indeed.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
    - wfunction 13y ago
      > Asians comprise < 5% of the US population, so the first option strikes me as highly unlikely. It doesn't strike me as highly unlikely. Asians tend to have much higher education levels than Whites: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0229.pdf http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0229.p...
  - wchou 13y ago
    That ratio cannot possibly be > 1 considering that there are more White students than Asian students at these colleges.
    - wfunction 13y ago
      Wait, what? I asked about candidates who would be accepted, you're talking about candidates who are accepted. When the whole question is about discrimination in the admissions process, you can't just assume those two are similar quantities without backing it up.
      - wchou 13y ago
        Consider the following true statement: IF there were more qualified Asian applicants than qualified White applicants (ratio > 1) _and_ admissions was not racially biased, THEN there should be more Asians than Whites in the student body. We know that there are more Whites than Asians in the student body of these colleges, so look at the contrapositive: IF there are more Whites than Asians in the student body, THEN there more qualified White applicants (ratio <= 1) _or_ admissions was racially biased.
        wfunction 13y ago
        I don't get it. If you agree with me that admissions could be racially biased, then what makes you think "That ratio cannot possibly be > 1"?
        wchou 13y ago
        I meant racially biased against Asians. Look carefully at the logic statement I wrote - it means that one of two things must be true: 1. There exists racial bias specifically against Asians in admissions. 2. Qualified White applicants outnumber qualified Asian applicants. If you concede (1), then your point that Asians get treated more harshly because they're majority is moot. If you concede (2), then, as you said, your argument doesn't work since "ratio < 1". I don't know how to make this more clear than by using propositional logic.
- newnewnew 13y ago
  In the Myth of American Meritocracy[1] Ron Unz shows that non-Jewish white students face 5x as much discrimination as Asian students in comparison with their proportion of the general population, and 2x as much when compared with their proportion of national merit scholars. I don't think it matters to anyone, though, because they're white kids. [1]http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-...
  - anonymoushn 13y ago
    Although this article is interesting and worth a read, it is very difficult to verify that your source backs your claim. It is unclear whether the reader is supposed to perform some calculations upon some figures in the source material to arrive at your claims or whether, by exhaustively searching many different paraphrasings of your claims, one could eventually find the same claims made in the source.
    - newnewnew 13y ago
      Sorry, commenting on the go. non-jewish white % in ivy league is about 30%, in general pop it is about 65% for a ratio of about 0.5x. asian % in ivy league is about 15% and general pop about 5% for a ratio of 3.0x. Asian ivy league pop % / merit scholar % given by Unz is about 70%. Same for non-jewish whites is about 35% Asians are getting the short end of the stick, but non-jewish white kids are getting it worse.
      - lsc 13y ago
        how do they statistically account for 'non-jewish white?' - is there a box on the admissions paper asking how many Jewish grandparents you have or something? I mean, I've seen forms asking for my race, but I've never seen one asking if I considered myself Jewish. (and it seems, well, pretty slippery, as nearly all the people I know who identify as Jewish also identify as "White (non hispanic)" - And I've seen several studies saying that without cultural context, even experts can't tell Jewish faces from non-Jewsh faces from similar parts of the world.) Seems to me like there are a lot of people who could identify one way or the other, who will answer the question differently, depending on how they think you want the question answered.
newnewnew 13y ago
The unofficial ethic is that minority students must be treated fairly or have a bias in their favor. This is the first time that a minority group is negatively effected by racial preference policies, so it is newsworthy. This unusual event happens because Asians are an outperforming minority. Most minorities suffer from the "cultural bias" of the education system and do worse than whites. But Asians just seem to kick ass regardless. Affirmative action was designed to come at the expense of majority students only. Now that minority students are negatively affected, we have to rethink the justice of it.
- kenjackson 13y ago
  This is the first time that a minority group is negatively effected by racial preference policies, so it is newsworthy. You must not be in the US. The history of the US has been policies against minorities. It's only been since the early 60s has there been policies that favored minorities. And even then it has pretty much been relegated to schools (and most just undergrad college) -- it's never been very effective in the workplace. And affirmative action has been pretty much dead for the past decade.
  - newnewnew 13y ago
    > affirmative action has been pretty much dead for the past decade. According to the article, being black is like getting 450 extra points on your SAT compared to an Asian student. I don't think AA is as dead as you think it is.
    - kenjackson 13y ago
      If I thought the SAT was a useful metric you might be on to something. I used to be an SAT coach (back when the top score was 1600) and I could typically raise someone scoring between 1000 to 1300 by 200 points in 6 weeks. IMO it's just not a useful test, and I suspect the Harvard admin committee knows so as well. That said, it can be used as something to see how much work people are willing to do. In which case I think the delta over their HS peers is more useful than anything else. A 1500 at Andover would be a lot less impressive than a 1300 at Crenshaw.

esrauch 13y ago

If white and Asian students are the majority, they should be selected against based on their proportion of that majority. I believe some are suggesting that Asian students are being unduly discriminated against when compared to white students.

asdfologist 13y ago

You don't get it - the parent's point is that your argument doesn't explain why Asians take a much bigger hit than whites. "Asian applicants have 67% lower odds of admission than white applicants with comparable test scores."

wfunction 13y ago
What's the Asian to White ratio of qualified college applicants? i.e. are there more Whites or Asians who would be accepted based on factors other than their race? If it's > 1, then obviously Asians will take a bigger hit, since they're the majority, that's the whole point of my comment. If it's <= 1 though then yes, the situation is very interesting indeed.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
  - wfunction 13y ago
    > Asians comprise < 5% of the US population, so the first option strikes me as highly unlikely. It doesn't strike me as highly unlikely. Asians tend to have much higher education levels than Whites: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0229.pdf http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0229.p...
- wchou 13y ago
  That ratio cannot possibly be > 1 considering that there are more White students than Asian students at these colleges.
  - wfunction 13y ago
    Wait, what? I asked about candidates who would be accepted, you're talking about candidates who are accepted. When the whole question is about discrimination in the admissions process, you can't just assume those two are similar quantities without backing it up.
    - wchou 13y ago
      Consider the following true statement: IF there were more qualified Asian applicants than qualified White applicants (ratio > 1) _and_ admissions was not racially biased, THEN there should be more Asians than Whites in the student body. We know that there are more Whites than Asians in the student body of these colleges, so look at the contrapositive: IF there are more Whites than Asians in the student body, THEN there more qualified White applicants (ratio <= 1) _or_ admissions was racially biased.
      - wfunction 13y ago
        I don't get it. If you agree with me that admissions could be racially biased, then what makes you think "That ratio cannot possibly be > 1"?
        wchou 13y ago
        I meant racially biased against Asians. Look carefully at the logic statement I wrote - it means that one of two things must be true: 1. There exists racial bias specifically against Asians in admissions. 2. Qualified White applicants outnumber qualified Asian applicants. If you concede (1), then your point that Asians get treated more harshly because they're majority is moot. If you concede (2), then, as you said, your argument doesn't work since "ratio < 1". I don't know how to make this more clear than by using propositional logic.
newnewnew 13y ago
In the Myth of American Meritocracy[1] Ron Unz shows that non-Jewish white students face 5x as much discrimination as Asian students in comparison with their proportion of the general population, and 2x as much when compared with their proportion of national merit scholars. I don't think it matters to anyone, though, because they're white kids. [1]http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-...
- anonymoushn 13y ago
  Although this article is interesting and worth a read, it is very difficult to verify that your source backs your claim. It is unclear whether the reader is supposed to perform some calculations upon some figures in the source material to arrive at your claims or whether, by exhaustively searching many different paraphrasings of your claims, one could eventually find the same claims made in the source.
  - newnewnew 13y ago
    Sorry, commenting on the go. non-jewish white % in ivy league is about 30%, in general pop it is about 65% for a ratio of about 0.5x. asian % in ivy league is about 15% and general pop about 5% for a ratio of 3.0x. Asian ivy league pop % / merit scholar % given by Unz is about 70%. Same for non-jewish whites is about 35% Asians are getting the short end of the stick, but non-jewish white kids are getting it worse.
    - lsc 13y ago
      how do they statistically account for 'non-jewish white?' - is there a box on the admissions paper asking how many Jewish grandparents you have or something? I mean, I've seen forms asking for my race, but I've never seen one asking if I considered myself Jewish. (and it seems, well, pretty slippery, as nearly all the people I know who identify as Jewish also identify as "White (non hispanic)" - And I've seen several studies saying that without cultural context, even experts can't tell Jewish faces from non-Jewsh faces from similar parts of the world.) Seems to me like there are a lot of people who could identify one way or the other, who will answer the question differently, depending on how they think you want the question answered.

newnewnew 13y ago

The unofficial ethic is that minority students must be treated fairly or have a bias in their favor. This is the first time that a minority group is negatively effected by racial preference policies, so it is newsworthy. This unusual event happens because Asians are an outperforming minority. Most minorities suffer from the "cultural bias" of the education system and do worse than whites. But Asians just seem to kick ass regardless. Affirmative action was designed to come at the expense of majority students only. Now that minority students are negatively affected, we have to rethink the justice of it.

kenjackson 13y ago
This is the first time that a minority group is negatively effected by racial preference policies, so it is newsworthy. You must not be in the US. The history of the US has been policies against minorities. It's only been since the early 60s has there been policies that favored minorities. And even then it has pretty much been relegated to schools (and most just undergrad college) -- it's never been very effective in the workplace. And affirmative action has been pretty much dead for the past decade.
- newnewnew 13y ago
  > affirmative action has been pretty much dead for the past decade. According to the article, being black is like getting 450 extra points on your SAT compared to an Asian student. I don't think AA is as dead as you think it is.
  - kenjackson 13y ago
    If I thought the SAT was a useful metric you might be on to something. I used to be an SAT coach (back when the top score was 1600) and I could typically raise someone scoring between 1000 to 1300 by 200 points in 6 weeks. IMO it's just not a useful test, and I suspect the Harvard admin committee knows so as well. That said, it can be used as something to see how much work people are willing to do. In which case I think the delta over their HS peers is more useful than anything else. A 1500 at Andover would be a lot less impressive than a 1300 at Crenshaw.