Law Affirmative Action Abolished: U.S Supreme Court Outlaws Racial Discrimination In College Admissions.

[KeepItRealist]

What I find hilarious is this idea that standardized tests are culturally biased and discriminatory when they are based on the standard public education for every student in every school district in the country. Meaning you are taught the same thing despite race, religion or region.

It's one of those things where, it sounds good, but it's a facile argument. It works on plenty of people tho.

 

[Gregolian]

Well, at least you know that you weren't highly competitive grade-wise. I certainly feel bad for those kids with near perfect SAT's and 4.5 GPA's who don't realize there's a problem until they get the rejection letters and are left wondering what happened. I feel worse for the parents because they usually spent a ton of money over the years to try and secure that outcome.

Although...how bad can you feel when you're trying for something with a 95% rejection rate? You have to know the odds are against you from the beginning.

As for the State School thing, it's about the money. Funding for public universities has been cut in many states and these schools need sports and donors to offset the costs. Their admissions process is starting to reflect those realities.

Like, I got accepted every where I applied for.. WSU, UW, University of Oregon, Western and such... and had a decent set of grades coming out of high school (like a 3.7 out of 4) the real sticking point for me was the scholarship situation.

Dad made too much for low income ones, was the wrong type of racial minority for any specific ethnic group ones, and I am straight so any of the other minority group ones was out of the question. I got a small academic one for WSU along with a really small one for being a minority but compared to what some guys I know got....

I should have lost weight and gone into the military for the GI Bill

 

[panamaican]

It's been a while since I applied to an undergrad program, but don't you have to get accepted by the college/program? Like, as a Freshman, if you are accepted into a Liberal Arts program, but you really want to be in the Business School, you'd have to apply for a transfer. Granted, you'd already have a foot in the door, so it would likely be easier to transfer than to get in as a freshman.

That's pretty much what they said they fear. Use one major to get in the door and then push to change over to something else.

 

[panamaican]

Like, I got accepted every where I applied for.. WSU, UW, University of Oregon, Western and such... and had a decent set of grades coming out of high school (like a 3.7 out of 4) the real sticking point for me was the scholarship situation.

Dad made too much for low income ones, was the wrong type of racial minority for any specific ethnic group ones, and I am straight so any of the other minority group ones was out of the question. I got a small academic one for WSU along with a really small one for being a minority but compared to what some guys I know got....

I should have lost weight and gone into the military for the GI Bill

I don't have a lot to add there. I was a National Merit Finalist and most places see that and just hand you money.

I have been reading about kids who are locking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in scholarship money because most people don't apply to the small scholarships out there.

 

[Gregolian]

I don't have a lot to add there. I was a National Merit Finalist and most places see that and just hand you money.

I have been reading about kids who are locking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in scholarship money because most people don't apply to the small scholarships out there.

I wasn't a National Merit Finalist but was a part of that National Honor Society thing and applied for every scholarship placed in front of me but only got like the 2 I mentioned. Was even in the Honors program at EWU and WSU but neither school gave me more cash and I didn't qualify for any grants.

 

[lifelessheap]

Scores have never, EEEEEEEEEVER been the end all. What are you talking about schools not looking for extracurriculars? I went through the admissions process for an Ivy League school, and it couldn't have been made clearer to me that perfect scores were not an auto admit. Same for the various state schools I was looking at.

For some reason people have this weird belief that academia is a straight meritocracy when it's never been like that, even before affirmative action was a thing. Hello, legacy admissions? Where are all the complaints about them? I guarantee they're bouncing more students than the marginal cases that always come up in these Affirmative Action discussions.

Scores don't matter! That is why sports don't use scores to see who is the best! I mean, who can run the fastest? Who cares, because records and scores don't matter?

If you can lift more weight than me that doesn't mean anything. Who is keeping score?

The NFL should be more diverse in your opinion, right? If college is too Asian then the NFL is too black by your standards, right? The NFL should consider other things besides performance to balance it out?


Why do Leftists hate basing things on merit?

 

[panamaican]

I wasn't a National Merit Finalist but was a part of that National Honor Society thing and applied for every scholarship placed in front of me but only got like the 2 I mentioned. Was even in the Honors program at EWU and WSU but neither school gave me more cash and I didn't qualify for any grants.

Honestly, they're light years apart in terms of criteria. National Merit Finalist requires you to be in the 1% of PSAT test takers and National Honor Society requires you to meet a GPA criteria. So, schools throw money at Nat. Merit recognized students in a way that they don't for National Honor Society.

I've only recently heard about the scholarship thing. From what I've read, these kids are sitting down and busting out 4- 5 applications a month. No one I knew was doing that in high school.

 

[Gregolian]

Honestly, they're light years apart in terms of criteria. National Merit Finalist requires you to be in the 1% of PSAT test takers and National Honor Society requires you to meet a GPA criteria. So, schools throw money at Nat. Merit recognized students in a way that they don't for National Honor Society.

I've only recently heard about the scholarship thing. From what I've read, these kids are sitting down and busting out 4- 5 applications a month. No one I knew was doing that in high school.

If I could go back and change how I went through high school I would.

But I can't, so I'll just re-take the LSAT in like a year and start re-applying to law schools in WA.

 

[panamaican]

If I could go back and change how I went through high school I would.

But I can't, so I'll just re-take the LSAT in like a year and start re-applying to law schools in WA.

Good luck, focus on the logic games. It pays real dividends in terms of test scores and classroom performance.

 

[Gregolian]

Good luck, focus on the logic games. It pays real dividends in terms of test scores and classroom performance.

When I took it last time I got a 148. I know it's not amazing as it's basically dead center in what you can score but I got that doing basically no prep work other than reading through two separate LSAT test prep books and no practice tests.

This go round I think I'll be signing up for a prep class if I can find one.

 

[panamaican]

When I took it last time I got a 148. I know it's not amazing as it's basically dead center in what you can score but I got that doing basically no prep work other than reading through two separate LSAT test prep books and no practice tests.

This go round I think I'll be signing up for a prep class if I can find one.

I didn't take a prep class but I've heard very good things about them. I took one for the bar (no point taking chances on that test) and considered it money well-spent so I'm going to assume the LSAT preps are good too. Definitely get that score up, lots of schools tier their scholarship money on the LSAT so even if you don't choose some top 5 school you can really cut the cost of attendance.

 

[Falsedawn]

Scores don't matter! That is why sports don't use scores to see who is the best! I mean, who can run the fastest? Who cares, because records and scores don't matter?

If you can lift more weight than me that doesn't mean anything. Who is keeping score?

The NFL should be more diverse in your opinion, right? If college is too Asian then the NFL is too black by your standards, right? The NFL should consider other things besides performance to balance it out?


Why do Leftists hate basing things on merit?

Is academia sports? It's almost like totally different things might have totally different metrics for success?

 

[Gregolian]

I didn't take a prep class but I've heard very good things about them. I took one for the bar (no point taking chances on that test) and considered it money well-spent so I'm going to assume the LSAT preps are good too. Definitely get that score up, lots of schools tier their scholarship money on the LSAT so even if you don't choose some top 5 school you can really cut the cost of attendance.

I know I bitched about legacy admissions earlier but the attorney I interned for went to Seattle U and said he'd be willing to "go to bat for me" to help me get in if I was on "the bubble" so to speak. Basically if the system is in place and hasn't been changed I might as well take advantage.

 

[trac209]

I guess dedication and hard work isn’t the most important aspect of perspective student go figure. Tucker Carlson had an Asian student actually defending this practice.

 

[oldshadow]

Guess what you call a C student that made it through medical school?

Doctor

So shouldn't the goal be to have as few c students as possible by taken the best and brightest.

 

[Falsedawn]

So shouldn't the goal be to have as few c students as possible by taken the best and brightest.

You'll be shocked to know that some of those C students WERE the best and brightest of their respective peer groups.

It's almost like you're trying to project the fortunes of people 4+ years in advance and need to consider more than the ability to answer multiple choice questions.

 

[oldshadow]

You'll be shocked to know that some of those C students WERE the best and brightest of their respective peer groups.

It's almost like you're trying to project the fortunes of people 4+ years in advance and need to consider more than the ability to answer multiple choice questions.

Maybe but the better material you start with the better the end product.

Why keep the best and the brightest out .

 

[KeepItRealist]

Harvard rejects hundreds of white (and it seems likely now Asian) valedictorians across the country to accept minority and foreign students every year. Been that way for decades. It's why a lot of praise given in particular to black students who attended Ivy League schools from the 1960s to present is way exaggerated since the standards were so much lower and they were actively recruited to minimal standards for admission.

Only one person from my 2001 graduating class got into Harvard. She was a black girl who had around a 3.75 GPA and 1190 on the SAT. She was a nice smart girl and did a bunch of extra curricular activities as well, but her getting into Harvard over our valedictorian who had a 4.5+ GPA and 1400+ on the SATs really emphasized how unfair affirmative action is.

 

[Falsedawn]

Maybe but the better material you start with the better the end product.

Why keep the best and the brightest out .

That's the just world fallacy, and not how we truly understand the world to work.

People are born with advantages and disadvantages. Some have intelligence, others have money, others have overbearing parents that push them into this that or the other.

Because a person had prep school tutors all their life and got straight As does not make them an inherently better candidate than someone who had significantly less support and succeeded on their hard work and perseverance through failure. Colleges are having a hard time now where people who have been spoonfed knowledge all their lives (and thus think that they're the cream of the crop) are failing out when they hit college because they no longer have the structure that was responsible for their prior success. You have to consider the candidate in totality, test scores are not the sole indicator of the "best and brightest". Your insistence that we maximize the best candidates but focus on test scores is an oxymoron. The two are mutually exclusive. Test scores are an indicator of success, but they are not the sole determinant and will never be.

 

[oldshadow]

That's the just world fallacy, and not how we truly understand the world to work.

People are born with advantages and disadvantages. Some have intelligence, others have money, others have overbearing parents that push them into this that or the other.

Because a person had prep school tutors all their life and got straight As does not make them an inherently better candidate than someone who had significantly less support and succeeded on their hard work and perseverance through failure. Colleges are having a hard time now where people who have been spoonfed knowledge all their lives (and thus think that they're the cream of the crop) are failing out when they hit college because they no longer have the structure that was responsible for their prior success. You have to consider the candidate in totality, test scores are not the sole indicator of the "best and brightest". Your insistence that we maximize the best candidates but focus on test scores is an oxymoron. The two are mutually exclusive. Test scores are an indicator of success, but they are not the sole determinant and will never be.

So you are saying those being excluded only have test scores going for them and otherwise they are inferior to those with loser test scores?

Any link to support this?

The case is they limit and admitt by race.

Which unfortunately cast a shadow on those that may be very good but are the race admitted for social reasons.