I may be injecting 1%'ile bias based on personal experience....basically 1%'er GPA peers would score highest in standardized tests. If I broaden my worldview and we expand that a bit on the bell curve and cover maybe 20% (likeliest to go to college), I can see this being an issue. If we work from the assumption that a college admission GPA represents a measure of work ethic and willingness to learn, even someone from a shitty school that cannot afford standardized test boot camps or whose school doesn't offer standardized test training could outperform a slacker from high income HS w/a shittier GPA. The preparation from a low income and high income HS may be worlds apart but work ethic is work ethic. FWIW: I was working under the assumption these were high performance Asians being Harvard and their strict entrance requirements.
Ultimately I think the message was just sent to The SC and the people bringing these cases that these schools will not be bullied into turning their schools into The Universities of China.There are plenty of ways to achieve diversity without AA and ending the use of SAT scores is one step.
Joe Biden picked his VP based on race alone and provided the world with a crystal clear example of just how disastrous that approach can be.
It's hard to fathom just how important this decision is. The whole lexicon of 'DEI' is built on language in previous decisions that have now been overruled. In addition, the legality of corporate affirmative action programs is also now in question. What a great day for America.
what a clown. As if VP's are typically responsible for anything (save Cheney). Kamala's most consequential decision has been to tell South Americans to stay the fuck out and cons still hater her for it.
This quota was already banned on the state level for several decades in 8 - 10 states (e.g. California) and another 25 states do not even use quotas if a university wanted to use it. Essentially, it targeted (as I stated it should) Harvard and Univ. of North Carolina because those schools wrongly used quota even when they initially lied and stated they were not...later changing their story that they used it but not in a discriminating way. Unfortunately, those two schools have already found a way around the "race quota" through other programs (e.g. low income, schools that lack AP programs, private scholarships, et cetera) long before today's Supreme Court ruling. The only good thing, Asian students can access those other options too if they qualify especially considering the United States or most universities in the U.S. still categorize Asian students as a minority although some Americans disagree with their below definition. The definition below is not mine...the courts. A racial or ethnic group that is a small percentage of the U.S. population. Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos, American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders, Asians, and persons reporting more than one race. Regardless, affirmative action and quotas are different although schools like Harvard and Univ. of North Carolina abused them. Going forward, if the issue of quotas gets confused with affirmative action...many universities will drop certain less profitable sports or drop sports draining their budget. That would then open the door for gender crossing into other sports because a school no longer has a particular sport for a gender along with the fact students can not use affirmative action to force a school to have a sport specific for girls or boys. An example, in Kentucky...we had boys little league baseball when I was a kid but there was no little league baseball for girls. Therefore, girls were allowed to play on the boys baseball team and vice versa which allowed boys to play on the girls softball team. The same was true in other sports. Also, we didn't have a local brownie club for girls so local girls were allowed to join our boy scouts club. Also, I suspect you misunderstand one key aspect of affirmative action...equality. For example, a woman doing the same job as a man should be paid equally as that man. Another example, a university can not say that only students at their school that are White men are allowed to work campus jobs whereas Hispanic, Asian, Black, Indigenous, Women, Disabled, and Veterans that are also students must seek employment elsewhere instead of campus employment. Affirmative Action fights bullshit employment crap like that regardless if it's education, employment, and many other situations in life that have nothing to do with a university. An example that is more personal...my mom immigrated from France as the wife of a military officer. One year she ran for a board position in a club for family members of military soldiers. She was told, "no woman has ever sat on the board...we're sorry...your name can not be included on the ballot". This was in the early 1970's when we first arrived in Kentucky from France. In reality, my old man suspected it was because she was an immigrant that married into a U.S. citizenship. She recited military "affirmative action rules" and then threaten the board to make a public stink about the issue with the base commanders and local media. If you're curious about what the U.S. military thinks about Affirmative Action... The military is exempt from the statues prohibiting discrimination in employment. Nevertheless, its affirmative action efforts prohibit quotas. The core of their strategy is to build the pool so that there are minorities and women fully qualified to enlist, succeed, and rise. When I myself served in the military. I met a recruiter that had orders to recruit more minorities especially concentrating on Asians. Today, there are +5.3% Asian military officers in comparison when I served...there was only +2.2% Asian military officers. This is a military that prohibits quotas but strongly uses affirmative action rules in their recruitment efforts. Also, like many other things in life... it's common to see the phrase affirmative action with quotas in government jobs but not in the same category...not dependent on each other. In contrast, education is different and has been misused although many states already have existing bans on it. California bans quotas and below is the info from Stanford in California: Stanford University is committed to fostering a diverse and inclusive campus community. As of Fall 2020, Stanford had a total undergraduate enrollment of 6,996 students with 21.2% being White, 12% being Asian, 9.9% being Black or African American, 16.4% Hispanic or Latino, 6.4 % two or more races and 1 % American Indian/Alaska Native respectively showing the university’s commitment towards diversity in its student body population. The Class of 2024 saw 40 percent accepted students as first-generation college goers while 72 percent identified as people from underrepresented backgrounds making it one of the most socioeconomically diverse classes ever admitted at Stanford University where over half receive need-based financial aid for their studies on campus. The faculty too has seen an increase in diversity with 4.4%, 3.9%, 0 2 % representing Black, Hispanic & Native Americans / Alaska Natives respectively along with 18 per cent overall growth since 2010 reaching 33%. To further promote inclusion & equity across campus , Stanford launched IDEAL (Inclusion Diversity Equity Access Learning Environment) initiative which was awarded Higher Education Excellence In Diversity Award by INSIGHT Into Diversity magazine in 2020. Stanford did (does) the above because of Affirmative Action...not quotas. Many university that bans quotas does something similar. Stanford plans to increase their enrollment of minorities while banning quotas. Race quotas needed to be banned...not affirmative action. wrbtrader
What I find funny is an Asia suing claiming discrimination from a school where Asians are represented 4 or 5 times their % of the population but.one Asian didnt get in and bitches about it....suing against preferential treatment while asking for.preferential treatment as though he has a right to go to a specific school. Supreme Court.worried about an Asian student not getting into Harvard wothout any proof that being Asian caused them not to be accepted...wtf. Harvard maybe gets 30,000 allocations for 2000 spots. Should all 28,000 sue every year for not getting in? I think thst is what should happen...anyone rejected from Harvard and UNC should sue.
Also, there have been other cases in front of the courts in the past that had nothing to do with race. It involved religion in which a private Catholic university discriminated against students of a different faith that wanted to attend that university without converting to catholicism although the case was settled in lower courts without making it to the supreme court. Something similar occurred with private Catholic schools discriminating against disabled students that had physical disabilities (e.g. one leg)...students that academically qualified were not accepted because of the disability. What got the above students into the private Catholic school after a lawsuit...affirmative action. wrbtrader