High Court Upholds Michigan Affirmative Action Ban

tres borrachos said:

Your application of "should" was proven to be irrelevant and false to boot. Nobody who knows anything about academia would think a "college" has lower standards than a "university" because of the name.

Click to expand...

Amherst and Williams Colleges (where my niece is) are among the most difficult places to gain acceptance into. they compare favorably to Dartmouth College or Yale College (of Yale University)

Ikari said:

I didn't say they did. Jesus, it's as if no one reads anymore.

Click to expand...

I read your words:

University should be exclusive and elitist, the highest benchmark of education and academia with the most diverse and rigorous of requirements. The best and brightest should be selected. For the rest, there's College (which should be different from University),

TurtleDude said:

Amherst and Williams Colleges (where my niece is) are among the most difficult places to gain acceptance into. they compare favorably to Dartmouth College or Yale College (of Yale University)

Click to expand...

I love Williams. It was one of the schools I looked at.

Check your PMs when you can.

Cardinal said:

Um, thanks, I'll think I'll wait on jmotivator's response, though.

Click to expand...

Which matters not to, or change the fact that I quoted what you said and placed it into perspective as unlikely.
And as this is a debate site, it is obvious that you could not refute what I stated.
So you are welcome.

tres borrachos said:

I love Williams. It was one of the schools I looked at.

Check your PMs when you can.

Click to expand...

My niece was almost a shoe in at Yale but she knew she wouldn't make the varsity The williams coach-after looking at her GPA (#1 in her class, boards-2250 or so) and her national ranking told her she'd be able to play at Williams and they would let her in. so she went Early Admissions there and was-as he noted-accepted.

tres borrachos said:

I read your words:

University should be exclusive and elitist, the highest benchmark of education and academia with the most diverse and rigorous of requirements. The best and brightest should be selected. For the rest, there's College (which should be different from University),

Click to expand...

You're not understanding the words. University should be elitist, built upon the highest and most diverse of academic standards. College should be below it, offering a more directed and focused education that is less diverse. Community College under that, for associates degree or prep to get into College or University, and below that Trade School designed specifically to teach a trade.

The question was asked if one would endorse only academic considerations for attendance into university. To which I said yes and that it should be further divided.

I fear some here need to reacquaint themselves with with their lost friend of reading comprehension.

haymarket said:

Let us hope that this is simply one step in getting rid OF ALL PREFERENCES in college admissions. And I do mean ALL. If we want to admit the most qualified based on HS GPA and some test scores like the SAT's - then lets use those and let in the best and deny admission to anybody else not making that standard of admission.

How many here would support that?

Click to expand...

I would. College admission ought to be 100% about grades and not at all about gender, race, sexual orientation or anything else. The best of the best get in.

haymarket said:

How many sports lovers would dare walk down that path?

Click to expand...

How many schools would dare walk down their path?

The philosophy or communications department isn't the thing that brings a ton of money into Michigan and makes them recognizable on a national stage.

Cephus said:

I would. College admission ought to be 100% about grades and not at all about gender, race, sexual orientation or anything else. The best of the best get in.

Click to expand...

Which is great when it happens like that. Unfortunately the only thing that's really changed since affirmative action first came into play in 1964 is that racism is really hard to identify. It's not like the good old days when racism when served up on a platter bearing the words "white" and "negro" water fountains. Otherwise we're sort of right back to where we started. Affirmative Action was obviously indefensible on its own merits, black people were always tarnished with the assumption that they only succeeded because of Affirmative Action, and white-on-black racism is pretty much impossible to prove. For black people who were/are the victims of racism it was always a lose/lose scenario.

Ikari said:

You're not understanding the words. University should be elitist, built upon the highest and most diverse of academic standards. College should be below it, offering a more directed and focused education that is less diverse. Community College under that, for associates degree or prep to get into College or University, and below that Trade School designed specifically to teach a trade.

The question was asked if one would endorse only academic considerations for attendance into university. To which I said yes and that it should be further divided.

I fear some here need to reacquaint themselves with with their lost friend of reading comprehension.

Click to expand...

You don't know the difference between college and university. Harvard College isn't and never will be below Golden Gate University. Or Rutgers University, since I see you live in NJ.

tres borrachos said:

I read your words:

University should be exclusive and elitist, the highest benchmark of education and academia with the most diverse and rigorous of requirements. The best and brightest should be selected. For the rest, there's College (which should be different from University),

Click to expand...

If not true of students, this is certainly the case with faculty.

TurtleDude said:

My niece was almost a shoe in at Yale but she knew she wouldn't make the varsity The williams coach-after looking at her GPA (#1 in her class, boards-2250 or so) and her national ranking told her she'd be able to play at Williams and they would let her in. so she went Early Admissions there and was-as he noted-accepted.

Click to expand...

Williams is a great school, as is Amherst which you also mentioned. I went to see Williams but didn't pursue it because I didn't want to go to school in MA.

jmotivator said:

High court upholds Mich. affirmative action ban | The Detroit News

"The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld Michigan’s ban on using race as a factor in college admissions.

The justices said in a 6-2 ruling that Michigan voters had the right to change their state constitution in 2006 to prohibit public colleges and universities from taking account of race in admissions decisions. The justices said a lower federal court was wrong to set aside the change as discriminatory."

Students of all races can now know that they got in to Michigan schools on their merit.

Click to expand...

It's not new. Since 1978 this has been how the courts have ruled.

Cardinal said:

Which is great when it happens like that. Unfortunately the only thing that's really changed since affirmative action first came into play in 1964 is that racism is really hard to identify. It's not like the good old days when racism when served up on a platter bearing the words "white" and "negro" water fountains. Otherwise we're sort of right back to where we started. Affirmative Action was obviously indefensible on its own merits, black people were always tarnished with the assumption that they only succeeded because of Affirmative Action, and white-on-black racism is pretty much impossible to prove. For black people who were/are the victims of racism it was always a lose/lose scenario.

Click to expand...

It's not hard to identify, it's very blatantly plain when it's coming from the black community. Of course, liberals refuse to acknowledge that black people can be racist. They seem to think that America will eternally owe black people extra benefits because of something that happened more than 150 years ago.

It's time to get the hell over it and get everyone to work their hardest. Nobody deserves an easy ride.

haymarket said:

The key here is ALL admissions based only on academic merit. In the past, some people who have a particular grudge against race based admissions find elaborate ways to excuse or justify other type of preferences. If academic merit is going to be the sole ticket in - lets stick to that for everyone at all colleges.

Click to expand...

Which you must know won't happen. It will simply return to the old system that values legacy or admissions officers whims over merit and diversity will be lost.

My preference would be that public colleges and universities would be a meritocracy. How each individual school wants to weight the actions that factor into admission would be up to them. If they want to go purely academic performance, that's fine. If they want to give weight to extra-curriculars, I'm fine with that. If they want to give weight to an individual with a compelling life story or a compelling essay, that's fine. If they want to look at community or charitable services done and factor that in, cool. I don't think every University has to be absolutely cookie cutter and I'm fine with different ones valuing certain aspects of what a person has done in their life differently.

However, I do think it should be MERIT, not who you are. I'm not in favor of weighing someone's application higher simply because they're a legacy. I'm not in favor of weighing someone higher because they're a minority race. I'm not in favor of a school weighing someone higher because they're male or female because the schools population is heavily slanted in the oppsite direction. I'm not in favor of a school weighing someone higher because they're in-state as opposed to out-of-state. I'm not in favor of a school weighing someone higher because they're from a state the school doens't have a student from (My University actively attempted to get a student from every state in the US).

I think Private Schools should be able to do their selections in any legal way they want. In their cases, if they feel artificially creating a racially diverse campus is beneficial then be my guest. If they feel that legacies are important and a grand tradition, then that's fine. But I think in terms of public universities it should be based on what you DO...not who you are.

Then again, I'm one of those strange people that would prefer a society where everyone DOESN'T go to college because to have such a society then the entire notion of college generally has to be watered down to a useless degree.

Excon said:

Sorry, but as I stated, a University has to say afloat, and that has to be considered.
As it really isn't that many, there should be nothing to oppose.

Click to expand...

As it violates the basic principle I have outlined - it would indeed be something to oppose. Merit is merit. It cannot be purchased with money. And to allow money to substitute for merit is a violaltion of the principle.

Cephus said:

It's not hard to identify, it's very blatantly plain when it's coming from the black community. Of course, liberals refuse to acknowledge that black people can be racist. They seem to think that America will eternally owe black people extra benefits because of something that happened more than 150 years ago.

It's time to get the hell over it and get everyone to work their hardest. Nobody deserves an easy ride.

Click to expand...

It's funny you say that, because conservatives often give the impression that black racism is the only type of racism that exists.

haymarket said:

As it violates the basic principle I have outlined - it would indeed be something to oppose. Merit is merit. It cannot be purchased with money. And to allow money to substitute for merit is a violaltion of the principle.

Click to expand...

I get it.
But it doesn't matter.
Universities need to stay afloat, so it has to be a consideration.

Cardinal said:

It's funny you say that, because conservatives often give the impression that black racism is the only type of racism that exists.

Click to expand...

Nobody ever said that, it's just that the left refuses to acknowledge it at all, I abhor racism of all kinds from all people. The only way forward is to create a color-blind society, not impose racist government programs against anyone.

Cephus said:

Nobody ever said that, it's just that the left refuses to acknowledge it at all, I abhor racism of all kinds from all people. The only way forward is to create a color-blind society, not impose racist government programs against anyone.

Click to expand...

That's great, but since I was referring to the difficulty of identifying and prosecuting white on black racism what you're saying is beside the point. Affirmative Action was created to address that point, though I think we can all agree that in execution it was always faulty from the start. So how would you identify white on black racism when it happens, or are you too going to say that being somewhat less common than the Loch Ness Monster it's pointless to even discuss?

Gipper said:

Haymarket is noticably anti-meritocratic. Athletic talent is merit. Black is not.

Click to expand...

Just the opposite. Merit is all I am considering.

As to athletic talent.....So is musical talent. So is cooking. So is writing poetry. So is drawing pictures. So is proficiency at sex. So are lots and lots and lots of things.

And while some of those do touch upon things in college, I do NOT want to make them what gets you in or out of an academic institution dedicated to learning and the acquisition of knowledge unless of course it is a cooking school or an art school or a music school where those things are primary at the school and they forgo regular academics. There are no colleges or universities that I know of which only teach team athletics and forgo regular academics.

danarhea said:

Admission should be based solely on performance. Period.

Click to expand...

What kind of performance?

Chaddelamancha said:

We would first need to find a way to ensure that all students, in every classroom, have the same learning opportunities before they go to college.

Click to expand...

That this is far from reality right now is why we have affirmative action in the first place, to attempt to bridge that gap. It seems that the right wing's positions require self-delusion that there is no more inequality anywhere in the country and that anyone claiming otherwise is just mean and jealous and trying to hurt white males over their obvious superiority.

We have a long way to go before institutionalized discrimination is gone and everyone really is operating in an even playing field. This kind of move doesn't make anything more fair, it just strips people of one of the ways they have to overcome the difficulties they face.

Cephus said:

Nobody ever said that, it's just that the left refuses to acknowledge it at all, I abhor racism of all kinds from all people. The only way forward is to create a color-blind society, not impose racist government programs against anyone.

Click to expand...

Then do something about the fact that a child born to black parents is five times more likely to be born into poverty.

tres borrachos said:

You don't know the difference between college and university. Harvard College isn't and never will be below Golden Gate University. Or Rutgers University, since I see you live in NJ.

Click to expand...

Universities are made up of colleges. A University can have a College of Arts and Sciences, a College of Engineering, a College of Computer Science, etc...Sometimes they're called schools as well. Basically, the difference between a college and a university is that a college offers degrees in one area, a university offers degrees in multiple areas. One isn't superior to the other academically.