From article in OP
Welcome to the new racial paradise, I suppose
And the apologists of racist AA say race is just "one of many factors and is not determining in any way"
My opinion is known: let the best students in. Tests are not racist.
Should it be harder for Asians to get into good schools?
- Thread starter Narz
- Start date
And the apologists of racist AA say race is just "one of many factors and is not determining in any way"
My opinion is known: let the best students in. Tests are not racist.
wolfigor
Emperor
We share the same point of view here: objective tests should be the only parameter to get access to university.
People from poorer background will then get economic help to be able to complete their studies.
And the apologists of racist AA say race is just "one of many factors and is not determining in any way"
Well, you're quite right that other factors make the impact of race completely impossible to judge - I'm a - ahem- mature grammar-school educated British former soldier with a keen interest in sport, and any one of those factors has a much greater bearing on my character than my being white. However, my being white makes me infinitely more likely to belong to that social group which does go to grammar school (I can honestly say that there were no black students in my school, in fact I'd be surprised if there were any black people in the area in which I lived), which does join the army and which does have an interest in shooting, boxing and rugby. The simple fact is that certain ethnic groups are hugely based in particular social groups, and to ignore that would be a great mistake for universities.
Well, the British universities say that actually, it's much easier to get 80% on the admissions test if you've had fifteen years of uninterrupted schooling, you come from a supportive, stable family, and they've paid to get you the best education. For somebody coming from a stereotypical 'broken home' and a poor educational background, it's actually much harder, regardless of innate ability. As such, over here that generally functions as a 'tie-breaker' between pretty-much equal candidates, although a few universities have started actively promoting those from less well-off backgrounds.
And the apologists of racist AA say race is just "one of many factors and is not determining in any way"
My opinion is known: let the best students in. Tests are not racist.
Opportunities to prepare for the test are racist.
No, they are not. They're based on innate ability, access to quality education (which is a function of wealth and some other factors), intellectual environment at home, and other smaller factors. Race may be correlated to some of those factors, but that doesn't it make a cause. To address race in order to address inequality of opportunities would be like addressing height (tall people make more than short people, and the difference is statistically significant).
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
I'm really not seeing how people are going from "attempts to exactly proportion the racial composition of the student body to the general population are pea-brained" to "all affirmative action is bad for this reason", given that most of it doesn't and never has taken this form. (Frankly, I suspect this to be some sort of subtle attempt to keep up the number of whites at these schools, rather than some bizarrely literal-minded attempt at anti-racism.)
It doesn't mean that it isn't, either.
wolfigor
Emperor
So what's the alternative, racial quotas?
More to the point, opportunities (or lack of them) is mostly connected to social background and not (only) to race.
At least with tests everybody had the same opportunity regardless of race, religion, etc.
At the end we want high education to be meritocratic and not some poor attempt to social justice.
That's just as awful for all concerned. The 'tie-breaker' system works very well, as do exams which try to be education-proof - asking questions on pattern recognition, for example, rather than history, or the famous Oxbridge interview which throws up questions too bizzare for anyone to have prepared for them. These aren't perfect, but they're better than a 'normal' test for selecting the best people.
However, race correlates to a huge extent with social background. Perhaps 'accent' would be a better filter, at least over here.
So because they are black, they are denied those opportunities to prepare for the test. And because they don't do as well on the test, they are denied opportunities to get into college. And because they didn't get into college, they are denied opportunities to do well in life. Which causes the next generation to have the same experience. And all the while people like to pretend that racism isn't the cause of it all.
So because they are black, they are denied those opportunities to prepare for the test. And because they don't do as well on the test, they are denied opportunities to get into college. And because they didn't get into college, they are denied opportunities to do well in life. Which causes the next generation to have the same experience. And all the while people like to pretend that racism isn't the cause of it all.
Not racism, at least not entirely, dear boy. I know that America is on the whole a much more racist place than here, but we still have the same issues, because the rich can pay for better education and coaching their children through interviews for university and work and lo, they end up educated at Oxford and working in the City. To say that it's just the white man keeping the black man down is missing the point. Absolutely agree on the idea that it's self-reinforcing, however.
wolfigor
Emperor
Writing "racial quotas" was a provocation... I am all for objective test.
I also accept, to some extent the tie-breaker... as long as its bases on census (wealth) and not race.
I agree with you that tests can be improved and, in my view, there is no need of any AA.
However for some type of education you need tests that verify actual knowledge and not only "intelligence".
For example if you want to access engineering you need to have a very solid base of mathematic: the university cannot start from scratch again, thus dragging backward those students already prepared to go forward at full speed.
I don't know in UK but tests usually check overall knowledge of topics from the national syllabus.
More diligent students usually score better.
I have to agree completely here.
The system is self-reinforcing, but not necessary tailored to keep the "blacks" or any other race down.
People with more resources will give better opportunities to their children... there is nothing to do about it.
If we want to help poor people of any colour and flavour it's much better to spend resources to make education better where they live instead of spending in useless and discriminatory AA programs.
Nobody deny them opportunities because they are black.
They get less opportunities because their families are more poor and/or less attentive to their children academic results.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Out of interest, I've heard it claimed that a lot of contemporary AA programs have ended up just acting as a buttress to the existing black and brown middle class, rather than actually encouraging a significant degree of social mobility. Anybody know if there's any truth to that?
Oh yes - you won't get an interview without good grades - but to seperate the 'great' from the 'good-and-helped-to-look-great' they ask incredibly awkward questions to which there is no 'right' answer, or to which the correct answer isn't really what they're looking for. As an example, the satirist Tom Brown was made by the bishop and Vice-Chancellor Doctor John Fell to translate from Martial:
Non amo te, Sabidi, nec possum dicere - quare
Hoc tantum possum dicere, non amo te
To which he immediately replied:
I do not love thee, Dr Fell,
The reason why I cannot tell;
But this I know, and know full well,
I do not love thee, Dr Fell.
The alternative is to get serious about addressing racial (not just socioeconomic) inequalities at all levels of our K12 system. If we shortchange our minority kids (and not just our poor ones, although they get the shaft the most) at every level before they take the SAT, then primarily using a test would be discriminatory.
There is prob some truth to this. For higher ed, if you are not capable of doing college level work, any kind of AA program will not help you. You still won't get in....so the poorest kids won't see much of an advantage (unless AA also impacted transfer students). It would be a bigger boon to more middle class kids (or kids who attended closer to middle class schools).
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
I too am all for socioeconomic and against racial affirmative action.
Probably. I know that the two kids in my high school graduating class who got into ivy league school with full scholarships available only to blacks both came from families with incomes around $300k per year.
Probably. I know that the two kids in my high school graduating class who got into ivy league school with full scholarships available only to blacks both came from families with incomes around $300k per year.
I don't really see the point of having a diverse student body just for the purpose of having a diverse student body. Are kids supposed to pick up on their different cultures through osmosis? I've known kids whose parents were from different cultures and I actually knew more about those different cultures than they did.
aronnax
Let your spirit be free
I agree with you. These schools are probably trying to ensure that the demographics fit rather than be seen as a school for Asian Students rather than a school for just students.
But I believe the outrage probably comes from the fact that these universities actually thought that it was a good idea to try and balance out the demographics by using quotas and being discriminatory!
In all fairness, Oxbridge interviews for sciences don't ask bizarre questions, they just ask very difficult questions.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the principle that it shouldn't be something you can learn in a book (or at least you need to learn the basic ideas, but you really should know them if you're reading science) still hold - so it's the application that counts rather than the knowledge per se?
Similar threads
