Will White Privilege End Affirmative Action?

[katsteve2012]

It’s now above 11% black, but regardless - only one in three would have qualified based on merit. As far as the legacy admissions, about half would have qualified based on merit. So while the legacies represent a higher percentage, a higher percentage would have qualified regardless.

Regardless, let’s get rid of all the favoritism.

As an aside, I once had the “pleasure” of working with two Harvard grads at a company where an Ivy degree was given top priority. One was the white son and grandson of Harvard men, and the other was a black young man.

Both were mediocre, but the white kid was suffocating to work with. He had obviously grown up with an air of entitlement, and thought he was the smartest in the room - constantly correcting people with 30 years more experience, and being wrong about it. NOBODY wanted him on their team.

The black kid was a nice guy. Based on the aptitude he demonstrated - he needed the same “repeat” instructions as the kids from no-name colleges - he was probably among the majority of black students who were admitted do to his race. I suspect he knew this, as he did not exhibit the same arrogance that the legacy did, and I much preferred working with him.

Just two instances out of thousands, but still….thought it might be interesting. Neither one would have gone to Harvard without favoritism.

If the current admissions standards were revamped, the impact on aspiring black students seeking to attend Harvard would be minimal from the standpoint of the actual number of blacks who are admitted.

However the share of Asian students would increase exponentially.

The long term outcome for the legacy admissions would be interesting.

 

[Lisa558]

If the current admissions standards were revamped, the impact on aspiring black students seeking to attend Harvard would be minimal from the standpoint of the actual number of blacks who are admitted.

However the share of Asian students would increase. exponentially.

That’s what Harvard is afraid of. If it were merit-based, the school would be 80% Asians and Jews!

And that’s why Harvard came up with the ridiculous excuse for rejecting exceptionally qualified Asians. Do you remember what is was?

 

[katsteve2012]

That’s what Harvard is afraid of. If it were merit-based, the school would be 80% Asians and Jews!

Yes indeed.

 

[Lisa558]

Yes indeed.

You might have missed that I edited my post and asked a question. Do you remember how Harvard figured out a way to reject exceptionally qualified Asians in favor of much less qualified blacks?

 

[katsteve2012]

You might have missed that I edited my post and asked a question. Do you remember how Harvard figured out a way to reject exceptionally qualified Asians in favor of much less qualified blacks?

No. I've heard of Asians voicing that they have been discriminated against in favor of lesser qualified white applicants.

 

[abu afak]

Liberal Brookings:

"....Race gaps on the SATs are especially pronounced at the tails of the distribution.
In a perfectly equal distribution, the racial breakdown of scores at every point in the distribution would mirror the composition of test-takers as whole
i.e. 51% white, 21% Latino, 14% black, and 14%Asian.
But in fact, among top scorers—those scoring between a 750 and 800—60% are Asian and 33% are white, compared to 5% Latino and 2% black.
Meanwhile, among those scoring between 300 and 350, 37% are Latino, 35% are black, 21% are white, and 6% are Asian...

We estimate that in the entire country last year at most 2,200 black and 4,900 Latino test-takers scored above a 700.
In comparison, roughly 48,000 whites and 52,800 Asians scored that high.
The same absolute disparity persists among the highest scorers: 16,000 whites and 29,570 Asians scored above a 750, compared to only at most 1,000 blacks and 2,400 Latinos....

COULD THE GAP BE EVEN WIDER?​

There are some limitations to the data which may mean that, if anything, the race gap is being understated.
The ceiling on the SAT score may, for example, understate Asian achievement. If the exam was redesigned to increase score variance (add harder and easier questions than it currently has), the achievement gap across racial groups could be even more pronounced.
In other words, if the math section was scored between 0 and 1000, we might see more complete tails on both the right and the left. More Asians score between 750 and 800 than score between 700 and 750, suggesting that many Asians could be scoring above 800 if the test allowed them to. ...

Race gaps in SAT scores highlight inequality and hinder upward mobility

www.brookings.edu

`

 

[Lisa558]

No. I've heard of Asians voicing that they have been discriminated against in favor of lesser qualified white applicants.

No, it’s primarily in favor of less qualified black applicants. Blacks are the ones getting in with the least of qualifications.

And you didn’t answer as to what excuse Harvard used to reject these bright, academically accomplished Asians. Hint: they came up with a subjective “personality“ test that would advantage blacks, and rejected Asians for being “unlikable” and ”unattractive to be with.”

Now I ask you: what would the reaction have been if blacks with 4.0s were rejected in favor of others with weaker credentials were admitted - and the excuse they was that blacks are unlikeable and unattractive to be with.

 

[AZrailwhale]

We had open book testing as far back as in high school when I attended in the 60"s.

Open-book exams are NOT easier than closed book exams

Oftentimes they are even more difficult.

An open-book exam will require the student to really understand the material and be able to locate and apply or analyze information and content rather than just remember it.

If a student has reading and comprehension issues, they are just as likely to fail an open book exam as a closed book exam.

When I went through EOD school ALL out tests were open book. There were at least two reasons for that; the first was that they were teaching us how to research hazards QUICKLY, the second was that no one could know all about the thousands of fuzes, projectiles and improvised explosive devices that have existed over ethe last hundred years. Just because a test is open book doesn't mean it's easy, the converse is usually true. Now multiple guess tests are easy, all you have to know is enough to exclude the obvious wrong answers. In college I had a professor who made easy multiple guess tests. I was talking to him about it one day and he denied it. I asked him to give me a test for one of his advanced courses that covered material we didn't, and I bet him I could pass it with a ninety percent or better. He did and I maxed it. Then I walked him through the test and showed him his patterns. If there was an "all of the above" or "none of the above", that was the answer. On complicated questions, the answers to previous questions were used as assumptions in the questions. In other questions two of his answers were obvious throw-aways with two plausible remaining answers, that reduced the odds of getting it right to fifty/fifty. He had been teaching and writing tests for thirty years and never realized what he was doing. Pattern recognition is your friend.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I'd cripple you boy. Even at my age now.

You're just a punk ass racist talking stupid.

Face the facts and shut the fuck up.

“Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, legacies, those on the dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.”

Daniella Silva, Study on Harvard finds 43 percent of white students are legacy, athletes, related to donors or staff, Study finds 43 percent of Harvard's white students are legacy, athletes, related to donors or staff

Peter Arcidiacono, Josh Kinsler, Tyler Ransom, National Bureau Of Economic Research, Legacy And Athlete Preferences At Harvard, Working Paper 26316, Legacy and Athlete Preferences at Harvard

Whites are getting the free passes. More unqualified whites are being admitted into Harvard than students of color.

Harvard is a private school; it can set any admission standards it cares to. It's funded by donations from alumni and the proceeds from previous donations. The rich and people with connections are always going to have a leg up over the average Joe or Mary. That's not racism, it's how power works. I'm sure that if you look at the traditional black colleges, you will find the same pattern but with black faces instead of white ones. All the Ivy League schools have always been bastions of privilege that accept a minority of non-privileged students.

 

[JoeB131]

As soon as you made your nasty smack against the JEWISH company - why bring up the fact that the owner was Jewish? - , your liberal antisemitism was apparent and I stopped reading.

Shameful that leftists are defending criminals and berating Jews.

The reason why it came up was because the person who interviewed me made a point of saying that they stopped doing any work on Friday after dark for the sabbath.

But they didn't show nearly as much devotion to making sure that Americans got jobs instead of undocumented aliens.

The point is, both the Jewish owner and the undocumented illegal were BOTH criminals. They were both skirting around the law. But the guy who wanted to put more money in his pocket is a little worse than the guy trying to take care of his family by working in a hot, non-airconditioned warehouse.

 

[JoeB131]

Like the man said, one small step forward for white women, one giant leap backward for white males

So what? I think in my career, I've seen one woman of color in a position she really didn't merit because someone was trying to fill an affirmative action quota.

I've seen dozens of whites who had no business being where they were at because of the Old Boy Network, because they were drinking buddies with the boss, because a senior manager was their father, because they were sleeping with the regional director.

 

[JoeB131]

No, it’s primarily in favor of less qualified black applicants. Blacks are the ones getting in with the least of qualifications.

And you didn’t answer as to what excuse Harvard used to reject these bright, academically accomplished Asians. Hint: they came up with a subjective “personality“ test that would advantage blacks, and rejected Asians for being “unlikable” and ”unattractive to be with.”

Now I ask you: what would the reaction have been if blacks with 4.0s were rejected in favor of others with weaker credentials were admitted - and the excuse they was that blacks are unlikeable and unattractive to be with.

First, I'd ask if you have any links. Because frankly, I'm finding this claim of "unattractive" Asians to be a bit questionable.

Secondly, diversity at Harvard is an important goal ONLY because of the outsized influence schools like Harvard play in our national politics and politics. It opens a series of opportunities that you simple aren't going to get going to a state university or an on-line college. This is why diversity is important, to give communities access to advancement.


Anybody being considered for Harvard is going to be fairly exceptional. So, um yeah, a black student who got a 3.5 GPA and a 1400 on his SAT coming from an inner city school impresses me a lot more than a white suburban kid who had tutors getting a 3.6 and a 1450 on his SAT, just by virtue of what that black kid had to overcome.

 

[Mac-7]

So what? I think in my career, I've seen one woman of color in a position she really didn't merit because someone was trying to fill an affirmative action quota.

I've seen dozens of whites who had no business being where they were at because of the Old Boy Network, because they were drinking buddies with the boss, because a senior manager was their father, because they were sleeping with the regional director.

I too have met incompetent people in positions of authority

and some of them were white

but I only hear libs attacking whites with a broad brush

 

[JoeB131]

I too have met incompetent people in positions of authority

and some of them were white

but I only hear libs attacking whites with a broad brush

I can't be responsible for what you 'hear".

The problem still remains, that as long as white people, particularly white males, control most of the positions of power in government, academia, and business, white people are going to have an unfair advantage in access to opportunity. Unless you very sensibly recognize this fact and set aside some opportunities for people of color.

 

[IM2]

Lisa is totally incorrect.

In this case the contention is that Asians are being discriminated against based on number of Asians turned down for Harvard admission.

Asians are 6 percent of the American population, but they were 25.9 percent of the students entering Harvard in 2021. That is a full 10 percentage points more than African Americans(15.9%) and more than double the percentage of Hispanics(12.5%) and Native Americans(11%). In addition, a study was published by the National Bureau of Economic Research and reported on the NBC.com web site on September 20, 2019, revealed this:

“Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, legacies, those on the dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.”

So what we see here is that whites are provided entry by a plethora of other preferences they would not qualify for if not for their race. The study shows that Asian admittance is not being stifled or reduced because Harvard must admit blacks and Hispanics that are presumably unqualified. Instead we see that it is white ALDC students who would not qualify under any other circumstance being admitted at more than double the number of Asians, blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans.

Admissions Statistics, A Brief Profile of the Admitted Class of 2025, Harvard welcomes students from across the country and all over, Admissions Statistics

Daniella Silva, Study on Harvard finds 43 percent of white students are legacy, athletes, related to donors or staff, Study finds 43 percent of Harvard's white students are legacy, athletes, related to donors or staff

Peter Arcidiacono, Josh Kinsler, Tyler Ransom, National Bureau Of Economic Research, Legacy And Athlete Preferences At Harvard, Working Paper 26316, Legacy and Athlete Preferences at Harvard

 

[katsteve2012]

No, it’s primarily in favor of less qualified black applicants. Blacks are the ones getting in with the least of qualifications.

And you didn’t answer as to what excuse Harvard used to reject these bright, academically accomplished Asians. Hint: they came up with a subjective “personality“ test that would advantage blacks, and rejected Asians for being “unlikable” and ”unattractive to be with.”

Now I ask you: what would the reaction have been if blacks with 4.0s were rejected in favor of others with weaker credentials were admitted - and the excuse they was that blacks are unlikeable and unattractive to be with.

Lol! You appear to believe that the "personality measurement" that you speak of did not also include measuring these "Bright academically accomplished Asians" against academically lesser qualified white students as well.

The numerical presence of black students already at Harvard or aspiring to get in is signicantly low enough that if they disappered from the university campus and dropped out of even attempting to apply altogether, it would make little difference in the outcome for Asian student admissions.

What about the impact of predominantly white legacy admissions on Asian students? Those admissions have a much greater impact of unfairness on Asians, and for the most part unfairness to everyone, even economically disadvantaged aspiring white applicants.

I appears that you believe discrimination against Asians at Harvard is in place strictly to enable them to cater to blacks, EXCLUSIVELY, and you also appear to believe that not a single black student present nor past has ever been qualified to attend Harvard.

I read this interesting article about this very topic sometime ago, but what was even more interesting were the comments about it from quite a few current and former Asian students.

Quite a few resent the legacy admissions, as well as those who get in based on generational wealth and privilege, and say so openly.

Where Does Affirmative Action Leave Asian-Americans? (Published 2019)

A high-profile lawsuit against Harvard is forcing students and their families to choose sides.

www.nytimes.com

 

[22lcidw]

I can't be responsible for what you 'hear".

The problem still remains, that as long as white people, particularly white males, control most of the positions of power in government, academia, and business, white people are going to have an unfair advantage in access to opportunity. Unless you very sensibly recognize this fact and set aside some opportunities for people of color.

The real truth is that we need the best. Not the bullshitting best. It is easy for you to type what you did. We have been hiring by your words for many decades. Many good people. Many not so good but hired by diversity laws. Opportunity is there. The ability may be different. The Americas will at some point have wars on their soil as common as Europe and Asia over the centuries. And with Africa there is very little knowledge because they never recorded themselves.

 

[katsteve2012]

No, it’s primarily in favor of less qualified black applicants. Blacks are the ones getting in with the least of qualifications.

And you didn’t answer as to what excuse Harvard used to reject these bright, academically accomplished Asians. Hint: they came up with a subjective “personality“ test that would advantage blacks, and rejected Asians for being “unlikable” and ”unattractive to be with.”

Now I ask you: what would the reaction have been if blacks with 4.0s were rejected in favor of others with weaker credentials were admitted - and the excuse they was that blacks are unlikeable and unattractive to be with.

You speak as if the "personality measurement" was purposely created to favor black applicants only, and did not also include measuring these "Bright academically accomplished Asians" against the personalities of academically lesser qualified white students
as well.

The numerical presence of black students already at Harvard or aspiring to get in, is insignicantly low enough that if they disappered from the university campus and dropped out of even attempting to apply altogether, it would make little difference in the outcome for Asian student admissions.

What about the impact of predominantly white legacy admissions on Asian students? Those admissions have a much greater impact of unfairness on Asians, and for the most part unfairness to everyone, even economically disadvantaged aspiring white applicants.

It appears that you believe discrimination against Asians at Harvard is in place strictly to enable them to cater to blacks, EXCLUSIVELY, and you also appear to believe that not a single black student present nor past has ever been qualified to attend Harvard.

I read this interesting article about this very topic sometime ago, but what was even more interesting were the comments about it from a number current and former Asian students who either applied to Harvard or attended.

Quite a few resent the legacy admissions, as well as those who get in based on generational wealth and privilege, and say so openly, because those issues have a much greater impact on far more than any other obstacle.

Where Does Affirmative Action Leave Asian-Americans? (Published 2019)

A high-profile lawsuit against Harvard is forcing students and their families to choose sides.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Lisa558]

Lol! You appear to believe that the "personality measurement" that you speak of did not also include measuring these "Bright academically accomplished Asians" against academically lesser qualified white students as well.

The numerical presence of black students already at Harvard or aspiring to get in is insignicantly low enough that if they disappered from the university campus and dropped out of even attempting to apply altogether, it would make little difference in the outcome for Asian student admissions.

What about the impact of predominantly white legacy admissions on Asian students? Those admissions have a much greater impact of unfairness on Asians, and for the most part unfairness to everyone, even economically disadvantaged aspiring white applicants.

I appears that you believe discrimination against Asians at Harvard is in place strictly to enable them to cater to blacks, EXCLUSIVELY, and you also appear to believe that not a single black student present nor past has ever been qualified to attend Harvard.

I read this interesting article about this very topic sometime ago, but what was even more interesting were the comments about it from quite a few current and former Asian students.

Quite a few resent the legacy admissions, as well as those who get in based on generational wealth and privilege, and say so openly.

Where Does Affirmative Action Leave Asian-Americans? (Published 2019)

A high-profile lawsuit against Harvard is forcing students and their families to choose sides.

www.nytimes.com

The reason the numerical presence of blacks is so low is that so few are qualified for admittance under “white and Asian” standards, and the leftists in admissions lowered the “black” standards until enough of them - as determined by Harvard would be enough - got in. That is how it works.

And I never said that not a single black would has ever been qualified for Harvard. Tell me - where did I say that? NO, you made that up because, I‘m guessing, you are a Democrat who can’t resist calling people racist when they object to discrimination against groups other than blacks.

To the contrary, I have said, and this is from stats, that about two out of every three students - not specifically Harvard, from prestigious, highly competitive programs in general - would not be there if they had to qualify based on “white” standards. So it’s not that NO black kids would be at Harvard, but rather than 11% of the body they are now, only about 4% would be black. The left seems that unacceptable, and rather than have the other 7% go to a lesser-ranked but still good college for which they qualify, they adjust the standards down for them.

As far as legacy admissions, I already said I’m fine with abolishing that as well, since I believe admission should be based on merit alone.

 

[Mac-7]

I can't be responsible for what you 'hear".

The problem still remains, that as long as white people, particularly white males, control most of the positions of power in government, academia, and business, white people are going to have an unfair advantage in access to opportunity. Unless you very sensibly recognize this fact and set aside some opportunities for people of color.

You have no idea how crazy and bigoted you are

the left is attacking whites the same way you accuse whites of being toward blacks

you have morphed into the thing that you hate