POLL: Should your race be a factor in college admissions?

Remove all ads!

Well, Sprite reminded me of an interesting point. Did you know that black colleges in Alabama recruit and give scholarships to white kids in an attempt to diversify? This was challenged a year or plus ago and a federal judge required it to continue.

So, basically, if you're white you get a benefit if you go to Tuskegee University or Alabama A&M or.... I wonder why these programs and the complaints aren't part of the main stream? It is telling to me that a traditionally black college is Alabama A&M and a traditionally white college is the University of Michigan or Harvard. Not quite as many people trying to get into A&M to improve their lot in life. There is a point in there somewhere.

 

I didn't even read the links, but by the looks of the topic I'd say it's a question of the already quite commonly known decision made in the US just a while back.

The already often used example of "give fish vs. teach to fish" example applies here as well. In a different manner of course, but it does. No use giving someone a gold medal over something they didn't do just so they'd feel better about it. Especially so when the gold-medalist is then placed to handle tasks that require them to be as capable as if they'd earned the medal themselves. Perhaps inserting diploma instead of gold medal would've been more appropriate. I'm sure you catch my point nevertheless.

This all reminds me of an argument I had with an otherwise very farsighted and mentally developed history teacher in high-school. She claimed it was only fair that women should receive the same overall wage as men in a very physical male-dominated work (forestation, I believe it's called in English). As in, while a male would cut down and prepare 10 trees in a certain amount of time, and a woman would do highest 80% of this, they should still get the same wage. What's the point in that? Children are treated like that, not adults. Giving pity-awards at the expense of the empoyer who gets nothing back for his uselessly lost money isn't going to help anyone in the end.

Of course I see that due to the uneven fostering conditions of the different races, it isn't quite as simple as this. It's the only thing I can say about it though.

 

I wasn't speaking about PhDs from Harvard and you know this as well as I do, so please don't let us digress. Education at all levels should be provided at no fee, but without any extras - basic level of comfort. If one wants better conditions, he should pay. What's more, schools aren't just enterprises and aren't meant to bring profit to someone or a group of people, but provide education. When healthcare and education is just industry, the system is unhuman.

Oh well, we're not speaking about communist countries when the state tells you whom you have to hire. As you say: "the owners of a business have sole say in who gets hired". But there are people who need to be provided assistance in seeking jobs, perhaps some training, even information or encouragement... they should now there actually is someone who cares, that they aren't condemned to be born and die in poverty and dirt and that they can change their lives. Some of them even already try, but lack experience, knowledge or even just small initial funds that seem ridiculous sums to more affluent people. Of course you may turn a swarm of lessez-faire arguments at me, but each penny spent on this will result in dollars in the future. The role of the government is to govern and not to warrant anarchy or legalise free for all outcome in which the strongest win - society is of and for all people, not only the best fighters who don't always use honest or ethical means and who take advantage of the weaker ones as they see fit and make law of that. And no, I'm not a commie before anyone asks. I just don't believe in that might makes right.

And what gives you the right to say that those people 'don't work'? You seem pretty confident of this as you're even using present tense here. Who doesn't work get's fired, isn't this obvious? As Those who demand help but aren't eager to help themselves shouldn't get anything. I used to be more generous, but when I see my family paying 45% income taxes and people spending social funds money on booze and cigarettes, I'm cured of such ideas. I believe that creating jobs is much better than charity grants.

This is illogical and not what I said.

This depends on the family. Not everyone has peace at home and can do homeworks, study for exams etc. Such people should be provided assitance and special care (yes, it's sort of preference) and not discrimantive bonus points.

 

Hm, my view on the affirmative action is, it's the cheap way out. The problem is, are all school having a minimal standard ? Or are schools very different and some schools are very bad ? If there are a lot of bad schools, where are they ? And if there are a lot of differences betweens schools, then admitting someone to college, even if he's education wasn't good enough to let this someone survive there, maybe the cheaper, but rather sensless way, to balance the school difference. The more expensive, but better way would be to rise the general standards of schools. Then everyone would have the same chance to learn. At least, that's the main problem in my country.

 

Man, I was away for 4 days and got back 1½ days ago; can’t believe I missed this thread (and the one on Tables Turned). Anyway, I don’t have much to add that hasn’t already been said. Just a couple of comments.

I don’t feel that race should be a factor; rather (and this has already been expressed), consideration should be given to socio-economic background, but a point-based system seems too inflexible. I agree with chev here – where appropriate, there should be a combination of financial assistance and allowances made for those raised in environments where they perhaps were unable to achieve the grades they would otherwise received. The challenge is coming up with a fair and equitable system to achieve the desired results.

Foradasthar raised the “give fish vs. teach to fish” analogy. I think this applies perfectly here. It is better to spend public money on education and end up with people who are able to support themselves, rather than use that money for social assistance handouts.

 

I've always thought it would make more sense if instead of giving your name and race on an application, you gave your social security number or were assigned an arbitrary PIN number. No one looking at the application would know what race, religion or ethnicity you were, and thus the rating system would be purely academic and economic. That way Shaniqua, Bobby, Samir, Hiroki, Sven, Nanook and Enrique would all have equal footing going in.

Of course, the application would contain information about your school and it's rankings, your extracurricular and community activities, family's income and all that to determine one's background and educational opportunities up to that point. But one's race should be left completely out of it. That's the only way to make it fair. Whites can come from the ghettos, just as blacks can come from the Hamptons. Given, both of these are less likely than their opposites, but that's not up to the school to recognize.

 

By the way, it also may come to a "the tables have turned" problem. My understanding is, that immigrants from asia generally have better school results as others. Which would make them overrepresented in higher-education. I hear:"Let the whites in !"

 

If they actually are better then that's what they deserve.

 

As a side note to the Asian thing so are atleast here in Sweden and I am pretty sure elsewhere too women vastly overrepresentated in higher education nowadays. I think more or less 60% of all university degrees are women and the number is rising. We men are on the verge of being cast into the position of menial house workers and reproductive machines! Oh the horror!

 

Hum, thats why Asians don't recieve benefits from Affirmative Action. People don't seem to understand that. It's not about minorities. It's about blacks, hispanics, and american natives. No other minority gets benefits. As far as I understand, nor do women.

 

I was reading an article about this and something the author said really drove the point home. It's discrimination, we're treating someone differently because of race, true fairness would be to give neither fear nor favour with people getting in soley on the basis of their knowledge AT THAT TIME, not knowledge they will hopefully get later on.