ThePlayDrive
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2011
- Messages
- 19,610
- Reaction score
- 7,647
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Meh, I went to a top 10 college and diversity (in all ways, not just race) was something they emphasized. Most top schools do because having students who offer different perspectives enriches the school environment. My college experience would have been much less fruitful without all the different types of people that were admitted.College isn't about diversifying your *college* - students come and go rather quickly. They don't hang around for decades. It's about taking in students that have proven their selves worthy of your college name and who will value their education the most.
Education and prowess for knowledge should be the only factors.
Whatever.As I said, it was smarmy and pointless. This is a debate board, the majority of what we write here are opinions. You don't have to point out the obvious. All I wanted to know was if you actually had something worthwhile, or if you were just being smug and trying to feel better about yourself and that's it. It seems that you don't have any worthwhile argument. That's it. I'm not upset, I don't need to relax...already there. Just wanted to know if you have anything of substance or if smarmy and pointless is all we're gonna get. You've answered that, now we're done.
I would be more content if 'personal' details were exempt: no family history, race - nothing of that nature . . . your educational goals, history and abilities should be heavily relied on.
I disagree. I benefited heavily from being around people of different races, religions, nationalities, etc.. People's "personal details" contribute quite a lot to the quality of scholarship at a school and I agree that the academic factors should be the primary consideration, but the others should still be considered.I would be more content if 'personal' details were exempt: no family history, race - nothing of that nature . . . your educational goals, history and abilities should be heavily relied on.
Not all schools turn students away from general enrollment - I've yet to run into that issue. So to me it seems to be related to the 'higher' end of the colleges. If you don't get in there are always others options open.
I firmly disagree. Ireland, Israel, Italy, and Germany do not have racist immigration/citizenship policies. They are not based on any ideas of racial/ethnic/religious superiority.
Thet are based on the desire to preserve their nation-state's cultural balance and heritage. There is NOTHING racist about this.
Nor is it racist to discriminate based on race in schools, if this is NOT motivated by feelings of racial superiority. Is it racist for Christian schools or Jewish schools to insist on having at least 75% of its students be of a certain faith? Certainly not.
If we're talking actual mechanics, yes I would not have been turned down by University. But that wasn't what you said. You said that if a school essentially doesn't have enough minorities that they keep accepting them over others till some set number of minorities are reached, even if those discarded were more qualified for academia. Academia should not be set by PC crap, particularly on the University level it should be exceedingly elitist. You can do it or you can't, and if you aren't better than the guy next to you....there's the door.
never thought we'd see the day where we treat minorities like pokemon...gotta catch them all.
If you want to harp on a hypothetical example, then what happens if the white candidate get 3.55 and the black candidate gets 3.5? These things don't always have clear answers like your example that the white student is some brilliant kid while the minority student is barely passable.
But there are other factors as well. ACT/SAT scores, extra-curricular activities, community service projects, etc. There's plenty of indicators beyond just the GPA to indicate dedication and drive; which is what University would primarily want. Ability and desire.
College isn't about diversifying your *college* - students come and go rather quickly. They don't hang around for decades. It's about taking in students that have proven their selves worthy of your college name and who will value their education the most.
Education and prowess for knowledge should be the only factors.
College isn't about diversifying your *college* - students come and go rather quickly. They don't hang around for decades. It's about taking in students that have proven their selves worthy of your college name and who will value their education the most.
Education and prowess for knowledge should be the only factors.
I would be more content if 'personal' details were exempt: no family history, race - nothing of that nature . . . your educational goals, history and abilities should be heavily relied on.
The only issue with this is that some ethnic groups have historically had less exposure to college and university education than others, which means those ethnic groups don't know the value of education and prowess for knowledge.
Affirmative Action programs allow those ethnic groups to realize it by experiencing it.
The only way to fight racism is to engage in racism.....brilliant.
Keeping an alumni association is important, and diversity is a selling point for some university, if not most. Friends that I made and people that I interacted with in university has a profound impact on me as person because at that age I was growing fast intellectually and learning things that would stay with me for life. If those 4 years aren't important, college would not be such a big issue.
And how do you measure "prowess for knowledge"?
The only issue with this is that some ethnic groups have historically had less exposure to college and university education than others, which means those ethnic groups don't know the value of education and prowess for knowledge.
Affirmative Action programs allow those ethnic groups to realize it by experiencing it.
Well, as I mentioned earlier, most of that kind of information is used more for demographic purposes than for purposes of providing aid of some kind or another.
For example, AARP may need that information to learn how many retirees are seeking university or college education for one reason or another. Or the National Organization of Women uses that information to determine the entrance and drop-out rates of women.
Did you go to a religious, racially, ethnically, nationally diverse school?They are important - but not in *that* sense. At least not for me: I don't go there to socialize and concern myself with the overall racial makeup of the school. I go there to learn and that doesn't require anything else. I guess it's just not important to me. School is school - it's not a lifestyle or a social event. Maybe that's what happens when you're older.
Well, if you just "try hard enough," you should be able to overcome any supposed disadvantages thrown your way, ain't that right? Ain't that what conservatives always say?
Most folks on this board know that I'm Asian-American. I am ****ing blessed to be from an upper middle-class socioeconomic background. Asian-Americans are probably the group most disadvantaged by affirmative action. But you know what? I don't five a flying ****. My race wasn't enslaved for hundreds of years. My race isn't just pulling its ass out of the ditch that was Jim Crow. My race isn't being stopped for driving while black, and my race isn't the one that's being ghettoized, living in ****ty neighborhoods, and facing housing discrimination. (and if you don't believe me on any of these, the sociological data is out there. Just look for it.) I mean, ****, we have it pretty ****ing good in this country!
So I'm sick of white folks whining and bitching about affirmative action (aka "reverse racism") while failing to acknowledge the existence of white privilege - which is affirmative action for white folks by default. And believe me, it exists. It's just a lot less noticeable when you're white.
Not to mention people focus too much on college admission and job hiring policies - when what affirmative action REALLY refers to is stuff like outreach programs, building better schools in impoverished neighborhoods, job training programs, etc. Nobody ever focuses on that stuff because that stuff doesn't get people riled up. But that's what the meat of affirmative action policies have comprised since the 60s, the hiring/college admissions/quota part is only a small part of what affirmative action policies really are.
Did you go to a religious, racially, ethnically, nationally diverse school?
I don't think anyone is arguing that people should "define themselves by their college attendance and who sits in class with them". What most people, including myself, seem to be trying to communicate is the value that a diverse college atmosphere had to our college experience and can add to a college in general and using that as an explanation for why we believe diversity is a legitimate goal for universities to reach.My whole life is diverse - being a non traditional student I don't define my self by my college attendance and who sits in the class with me. My college doesn't seem to come down to the wire like that to add (makes me wonder just how many schools have to pick and choose students and can't just take them all - and why) Anyone who's in my college is in because they applied and not because of the color of their skin.
In the future: my children shouldn't be given special privilege because they look different - They should be given consideration because of their intelligence, creativity - these other skills and elements of being a solid student. Things that can be nurtured, furthered and shaped via schooling, education and homework - etc etc etc. I'm not about to encourage my children to think that their race and skin tone is EVER a determining or defining factor for them.
By the time you get to college you should be a set individual who doesn't need further 'exposure' but rather the ability to attend if you'd like and want.
I just saw this, but I thought it deserved a repost. Good post man.Well, if you just "try hard enough," you should be able to overcome any supposed disadvantages thrown your way, ain't that right? Ain't that what conservatives always say?
Most folks on this board know that I'm Asian-American. I am ****ing blessed to be from an upper middle-class socioeconomic background. Asian-Americans are probably the group most disadvantaged by affirmative action. But you know what? I don't five a flying ****. My race wasn't enslaved for hundreds of years. My race isn't just pulling its ass out of the ditch that was Jim Crow. My race isn't being stopped for driving while black, and my race isn't the one that's being ghettoized, living in ****ty neighborhoods, and facing housing discrimination. (and if you don't believe me on any of these, the sociological data is out there. Just look for it.) I mean, ****, we have it pretty ****ing good in this country!
So I'm sick of white folks whining and bitching about affirmative action (aka "reverse racism") while failing to acknowledge the existence of white privilege - which is affirmative action for white folks by default. And believe me, it exists. It's just a lot less noticeable when you're white.
Not to mention people focus too much on college admission and job hiring policies - when what affirmative action REALLY refers to is stuff like outreach programs, building better schools in impoverished neighborhoods, job training programs, etc. Nobody ever focuses on that stuff because that stuff doesn't get people riled up. But that's what the meat of affirmative action policies have comprised since the 60s, the hiring/college admissions/quota part is only a small part of what affirmative action policies really are.
This is the nature of man, not all of us, of course..
I don't think anyone is arguing that people should "define themselves by their college attendance and who sits in class with them". What most people, including myself, seem to be trying to communicate is the value that a diverse college atmosphere had to our college experience and can add to a college in general and using that as an explanation for why we believe diversity is a legitimate goal for universities to reach.
While it's an interesting position that 18 year olds should be "set individuals who don't need further exposure", it's not an accurate representation of reality. An eighteen year old is not even close to a set individual. Most people, including me, leave college very different people than they were when they entered. Moreover, while I don't believe anyone "needs" exposure, I recognize that interacting with people of different races, religions, orientations, backgrounds and nationalities gives one a more whole perspective of the world than one would have by only interacting inside and outside of class with straight, white, Christian, middle class Americans.
Moreover, while on the one hand, it's a noble goal to make sure that your child doesn't think their "race and skin tone is ever a determining or defining factor" for them, on the other hand, it's not an accurate portrayal of reality. Race does not "define" a child insofar as it does not determine their value, inherent abilities and potential. With those factors, all "races" are equal. However, race like religion, nationality and sexuality certainly has an impact on how the rest of the world treats them and in turn, how they view the world. Many colleges are starting to understand this.
While academic potential, creativity, curiosity and other similar factors should be the primary factors in determining applicants, there is still a lot to be said for "personal details" being secondary factors. Colleges, particularly liberals arts and higher ranked colleges, like for their campuses to be centers for exchanging ideas and they like their students to be exposed to many different types of ideas because it makes them better students, citizens and workers. You're going to get many more ideas on a campus with a great mix of races, nationalities, orientations, backgrounds and religions than you will otherwise.
You are making false assumptions about me with this statement. I don't know what you mean by "lengthy" life, since everyone has been around the same amount of time by 18, but I had already lived a diverse life by 18 as well so we are not different in our experiences in that manner. You don't know much else about so I'm not sure how you are able to decipher such differences between us. Nonetheless, I greatly benefited from being around even more types of people in college as an older person in a college environment.Well my exposure and view of college is just completely different - I'm an adult - and I already lived a lengthy and diverse life before the age of 18 . . . so I didn't need a school to foster and cultivate my exposure.
Our experiences have shaped us differently per our views.
I never said your children should "slide their way through life by relying on affirmative action". By claiming that this comment is "substituting your own reality for my reality", you are obviously misrepresenting my arguments.Well - then I suppose I reject your reality and substitute my ownI'm not about to hold faith that my children are going to slide their way through life by relying on affirmative action to skip them through.
Sure, but perhaps I should clarify what I meant by "value". I didn't mean value to the student body, I meant inherent value as a person. Race does not influence the latter, it can influence the former.And when you uphold measures like affirmative action you certain are applying 'value' to race when there should be none at all.
No, I think past experiences are just as valuable to the student body as future aspirations and "circumstance of birth" certainly influences the former. A campus filled with people who have experienced the world in a diverse amount of ways leads to more productive and valuable class discussion and learning opportunities than a campus filled with a less diverse group.If it comes down to 50 that all have the same GPA they should set the determining 'who goes/who doesn't' factor on non-race things - essay, Q and A - future aspirations, etc. . . not circumstance of birth.
Well for colleges that have the "limit", they have to choose and I think it's good that they want many different ideas on their campuses and you don't get many different ideas by accepting people who have the same or similar "personal details".Well you do hit a good point: I'm not striving to achieve in a liberal arts or higher ranked college. Thus - my institution doesn't have this 'applicatory limit' hurdle - we are diversified purely from our students who apply (which is everyone) and was accepted. Not because of those who applied and did or didn't make it. . .with so few colleges in the state and such a large % of poor - they don't have the freedom to pick and choose between colleges.
It's not though. I find this link interestingEducation and prowess for knowledge should be the only factors.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?