• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Affirmative Action (in college admissions): Good idea or Bad idea.

What's your opinion of Affirmative Action in the college admissions process?

  • I'm in favor of affirmative action.

    Votes: 5 10.6%
  • I don't think it should be used for criteria.

    Votes: 37 78.7%
  • I have no opinion.

    Votes: 1 2.1%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 4 8.5%

  • Total voters
    47
NYC said:
And I'm arguing that I don't think this is a sufficient sample. The systems made public in Gratz and Grutter indicate that the law school used a more holistic system, while the undergrad used a point system that gave minorities a 20 point boost, as compared to 12 points for getting a 1600 on the SAT.
Knowing the SOP of admissions and financial aide departments is fairly pertinent, IMO. I will say this, point systems and 'mechanical' systems where X race gets X points are atrocious and I do agree with the SCOTUS in this instance. So we aren't so far away from each other here. I too prefer a 'holistic' (that's a great way of putting it, by the way) method of preferential treatment.

NYC said:
Be that as it may, it doesn't contradict my point, which is that regardless of how much weight schools give to socio-economic factors, it is still less than they give to race.
Showing a SCOTUS case where a given practice is effectively outlawed does contradict a point that states that law schools currently used the outlawed policies. You showed an example where a mechanic point system is banned. It then stands to reason that school do not any longer use those systems for fear of legal action.

-NC
 
Knowing the SOP of admissions and financial aide departments is fairly pertinent, IMO. I will say this, point systems and 'mechanical' systems where X race gets X points are atrocious and I do agree with the SCOTUS in this instance. So we aren't so far away from each other here. I too prefer a 'holistic' (that's a great way of putting it, by the way) method of preferential treatment.

Showing a SCOTUS case where a given practice is effectively outlawed does contradict a point that states that law schools currently used the outlawed policies. You showed an example where a mechanic point system is banned. It then stands to reason that school do not any longer use those systems for fear of legal action.

The reason I cited those two cases was not to claim that schools currently use point systems, but to highlight how heavily they weighed race in their admission decisions.

You're 100% right when you say that the vast majority of schools use holistic systems instead of point systems. My point is that those holistic systems still place a very significant emphasis on race as compared to most other non-academic factors (and many academic factors as well).

After Gratz, UM was not permitted to use the point system any longer. However, there was not a drastic shift in the percentage of students who were minorities. The logical conclusion to draw from this is that they simply maneuvered around Gratz by inserting their existing preferences into the framework upheld in Grutter.
 
NYC,
I've gotta head out for a little bit, I'll continue this with you in a bit. Just wanted to let you know so you don't think I'm ignoring you.;)

-NC
 
A simple google search shows lots of articles about college admittance favoring males. "Affirmative Action" for males, whether or not it is mandated by the government.

[ame=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=9Fq&q=affirmative+action+gender+males+college&aq=f&oq=&aqi=]affirmative action gender males college - Google Search[/ame]
 
The admissions process in college is, by definition, discriminatory.

And when the discrimination is based on the color of someone's skin, then it's racist, pure and simple.

So, let's not try to pretend we're discussing something else.

We're discussing institutionalized racism.

You're in favor of it.
 
AA and various diversification techniques do in fact benefit white men. The impoverished, individuals with unique life stories, ECs, etc. are given the go-ahead. To reduce the programs to race and 'racism' is to ignore reality.

-NC

So what you're saying is that the programatic philosophy that says "when confronted with the choice between two otherwise equally qualified applicants, choose the one hardest to find in a coal cellar at midnight with the lights out", that the white guys make out best.

Yeah, sure. That makes perfect sense.

To someone.
 
AA and various diversification techniques do in fact benefit white men. The impoverished, individuals with unique life stories, ECs, etc. are given the go-ahead. To reduce the programs to race and 'racism' is to ignore reality.

-NC

And the lesson the white male who studied hard, got good grades, but had the total misfortune to be born to sober parents with jobs, what does he learn when he can't get into school? How is this process either reasonable or fair?
 
For what it's worth, diversity does enhance the learning process

It does.

You mean talking life stories over beers after class makes it easier to learn Kirkoff's Law?

Castigliano's Theorem makes more sense to the students when there's more substandard students in the class who got in because of racial considerations, not math scores?

How does the joint analysis of a truss framed bridge become simpler when the skins shades in the room are more like desert-camo than artic snow or coal-tar? Hmmmm?

it isn't some vague abstraction created by white liberals to make academia feel good about itself. It does provide for a more interesting and stimulating academic experience.

-NC

No. Affirmative Action is a specific racist program implemented by white socialist liberals to assist in destroying their feelings of guilt and to begin the destruction of the class structure as the God Marx proclaimed.

I had a stimulating and interesting academic experience.

And out of 200 or so freshmen entrants in the university's aerospace engineering program, all the people who got in on anything less than academic ability dropped out because they were too stupid to handle the courses. They suffered disappointment of failure, we suffered the annoyance of having our class time wasted by diversely stupid people who didn't belong.

And in the end, the 15% the completed the course requirements graduated because they completed the course requirements, and not one of them had had any need of getting into the program on anything other than their grades and performance.
 
Hey NYC, I'm back,
NYC said:
The reason I cited those two cases was not to claim that schools currently use point systems, but to highlight how heavily they weighed race in their admission decisions.
Fair enough, I, like you dislike and disagree with the implementation of over-zealous AA. Diversifying, like anything else can be done poorly and well. You certainly have cited examples of it doing terribly. So I'm with you in that regard.

NYC said:
You're 100% right when you say that the vast majority of schools use holistic systems instead of point systems. My point is that those holistic systems still place a very significant emphasis on race as compared to most other non-academic factors (and many academic factors as well).
Again here we seem to be on the same page, I do not believe that ethnicity or race should trump academics, only supplement academic info when selecting a candidate for acceptance.

NYC said:
After Gratz, UM was not permitted to use the point system any longer. However, there was not a drastic shift in the percentage of students who were minorities. The logical conclusion to draw from this is that they simply maneuvered around Gratz by inserting their existing preferences into the framework upheld in Grutter.
Here we go agreeing again. Again, I don't believe ethnicity should trump academics, only supplement them.

So it appears as though we hold similar views here, would this be a safe, agreeable conclusion:

Voluntary diversifying programs are acceptable at private schools so long as race/ethnicity does not trump the academic qualities of the student . It should only be used to promote diversity in instances when there is a high degree of disparity regarding a given ethnic group.

Sound good?

SA,
SA said:
And when the discrimination is based on the color of someone's skin, then it's racist, pure and simple.
No, it is not. Racism, by definition implies that a given race is superior to another. That assumption is not made here. The logic of AA, in my mind, is simple:
-Diversity is good
-Promoting diversity is therefore also good
-In instances when a borderline candidate is also a member of a disproportionately underrepresented ethnicity, accepting that individual would promote diversity.

SA, if there were two students with identical scores and GPAs, how would you go about choosing one?

SA said:
We're discussing institutionalized racism.

You're in favor of it.
May I ask what you would do to encourage diversity at a University?

SA said:
So what you're saying is that the programatic philosophy that says "when confronted with the choice between two otherwise equally qualified applicants, choose the one hardest to find in a coal cellar at midnight with the lights out", that the white guys make out best.
At Northeastern we just used a dark room, but a coal cellar isn't a bad idea.

You're making the mistake of only viewing this through the prism of racial minorities at a predominately white school. If a suburban black kid coming form an affluent family with very little interesting life experiences is matched up against a white kid who has lived a rough life, persevered through challenges and has equal scores/GPA, the white kid should get the call. Additionally, in the case of minority-majority schools, the same may be done for various white ethnicities.

What I'm saying is the issue isn't so...

Wait for it....

Black and white.
:doh

SA said:
And the lesson the white male who studied hard, got good grades, but had the total misfortune to be born to sober parents with jobs, what does he learn when he can't get into school? How is this process either reasonable or fair?
When he can't get into school? You mean when he can't get into A school, correct. If you have a 3.5 GPA and a 1300 SAT, you're going to college. Period. So the question as it is currently worded does not make sense.

-NC
 
It's a form of discrimination, hence it's wrong.
 
SA said:
You mean talking life stories over beers after class makes it easier to learn Kirkoff's Law?

Castigliano's Theorem makes more sense to the students when there's more substandard students in the class who got in because of racial considerations, not math scores?

How does the joint analysis of a truss framed bridge become simpler when the skins shades in the room are more like desert-camo than artic snow or coal-tar? Hmmmm?
No, I mean that having a black person in an African American studies class is helpful. Or that having an Indian in a class about the Indian-Pakistani situation is helpful. Or that having an Iraqi in a class about Islam is helpful. Can you truly not see an instance where having different people in the classroom would help?

(edited for telephone induced grammar/spelling mistakes)

-NC
 
Last edited:
Hey NYC, I'm back,
Fair enough, I, like you dislike and disagree with the implementation of over-zealous AA. Diversifying, like anything else can be done poorly and well. You certainly have cited examples of it doing terribly. So I'm with you in that regard.

Again here we seem to be on the same page, I do not believe that ethnicity or race should trump academics, only supplement academic info when selecting a candidate for acceptance.

Here we go agreeing again. Again, I don't believe ethnicity should trump academics, only supplement them.

So it appears as though we hold similar views here, would this be a safe, agreeable conclusion:

Voluntary diversifying programs are acceptable at private schools so long as race/ethnicity does not trump the academic qualities of the student . It should only be used to promote diversity in instances when there is a high degree of disparity regarding a given ethnic group.

Sound good?

Absolutely.

Thanks for the cordial discussion. :2wave:
 
AA and various diversification techniques do in fact benefit white men. The impoverished, individuals with unique life stories, ECs, etc. are given the go-ahead. To reduce the programs to race and 'racism' is to ignore reality.

-NC

Only to your latter sentence...To add to the programs to race and 'racism' is to enhance Liberal reality.

That's what Racist Liberals do, and professional Blacks. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Only to your latter sentence...To reduce the programs to race and 'racism' is to ignore reality.

That's what Racist Liberals do, and professional Blacks. :lol:
Just out of curiosity, what is a 'professional Black'?

-NC
 
Just out of curiosity, what is a 'professional Black'?

-NC

Jesse Jackson,,Al sharpton,,,B.O.? ...his "Pastor" for 20 years,,,The Rev. Wright...All professional Racists. That's how they make their living.:lol:

Can I have an "Amen"?:)
 
I believe that a limited form of AA based on things like class, race, background, etc. can serve the purpose of increasing diversity, which is indeed a valuable concern.

Wanting diversity in this case does nothing but hurt another type of person. Useually the race not being accepted in the name of "diversity".

The ONLY thing that should ever be determined for ANYTHING when it comes to positions in the school or work place is a persons GPA, and skills. Nothing else should matter.
 
Wanting diversity in this case does nothing but hurt another type of person. Useually the race not being accepted in the name of "diversity".

The ONLY thing that should ever be determined for ANYTHING when it comes to positions in the school or work place is a persons GPA, and skills. Nothing else should matter.

True...If, and when I hire a person,,,I base it only the concept that they'll make Money for the Company...:) If not,,,Good bye.
 
Last edited:
I see Afirmative action as just a soft version of racism.
 
I see Afirmative action as just a soft version of racism.

More along the line of overt black racist policy...as the standard.::roll:
 
Last edited:
Wanting diversity in this case does nothing but hurt another type of person. Useually the race not being accepted in the name of "diversity".

The ONLY thing that should ever be determined for ANYTHING when it comes to positions in the school or work place is a persons GPA, and skills. Nothing else should matter.

Do you honestly think that the value of an individual to a classroom/educational institution can be completely encapsulated by a number and a resume?

There are plenty of very good reasons for wanting students with a diversity of views, races, socio-economic statuses, and backgrounds.

A school composed of 100 rich white conservative guys from Greenwich is going to be a pretty ****ing boring school, as would be a school of 100 poor black liberal women from Bed-Stuy. The students at each of those schools would leave with a diminished ability to see other viewpoints and interact with different types of individuals.
 
Last edited:
Race is nothing more than a social construct, and I would argue that it is an inherently damaging social construct. Policies which attempt to influence race, measure race, use race as a criteria, or acknowledge race in any fashion at all perpetuate this damaging social construct.
 
No, I mean that having a black person in an African American studies class is helpful. Or that having an Indian in a class about the Indian-Pakistani situation is helpful. Or that having an Iraqi in a class about Islam is helpful. Can you truly not see an instance where having different people in the classroom would help?

(edited for telephone induced grammar/spelling mistakes)

-NC


How many blacks need reverse racism to get into a course of study as useless as African American Studies? Answer: None.

How many colleges don't have their student population of muslims nowadays?

Damn few.

How many people wanting to study something as useless as Islam would enroll in a university with no specimens to study? If they're that stupid, then it's their problem, and guess what? It doesn't justify racism.


Basicly, you can't define your acceptance of racism, and you have to come up with bogus examples.

A qualified white med-school applicant is passed over for a lesser qualified black applicant (we are now discussing how Affirmative Action really works, not your fantasy land of wonderful loving people). How does a black freshman from an American high school add useful "die-versity" to the medical school experience?

Correct answer: it doesn't.
 
Back
Top Bottom