Social DEI is so dead

[Fox by the Sea]

If some of these terms hurt your feelings because they have a negative connotation, perhaps you should call the waaaambulance.

weren't you crying about "white flight" a few pages ago?
perhaps you should call the waaaaambulance.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

They're going to pretend that defendant-submitted data is reliable since it favors their narrative. However, that's funny because even Harvard's fudged dataset doesn't spare them.


"But that's not a dramatic difference"
"A small bump over a small percent"


Is your comprehension of data sets really this poor? That's a massive difference. You realize the classic SAT is out of 1600, right? There's almost no room for scoring gaps at the near-perfect end of scoring.

Asian-American Harvard Admits Earned Highest Average SAT Score of Any Racial Group From 1995 to 2013 | News | The Harvard Crimson

Over an 18-year period stretching from 1995 to 2013, Asian-American students admitted to Harvard scored higher on the SAT than did their peer admits from other racial groups, according to data released in the admissions trial.

www.thecrimson.com

The gap there between Asian-Americans and African-Americans was staggering; 1534 on average for Asians over the period in question versus 1408 on average for African Americans. Now, that's bullshit, and we know that from past internal review documents ivy league schools released in prior decades looking at the academic indexing and undergraduate academic performance of their own minorities, but we'll go ahead and pretend this data is authentic for the sake of exposing how ignorant one has to be to make comments as misguided as the ones I've quoted here in analyzing it. That's the difference between a score that is around the 94% percentile and a score that is in the 99.8% percentile on the test. In other words, there are roughly 120K students who score 1408+ or higher every year. There's fewer than ~4K who score a 1534 or higher.

Understanding distribution curves is hard, apparently.

Yes, the closer you get to the maximum the smaller number gets

The point is, 1400+ scorers are rare and comprise the top students anywhere. College Board itself groups the 1400-1600 scorers together in their formal reports. And yeah, average blacks at Harvard are in this very top group.

This whole discussion started when I brought up that DEI isn't letting in 900 scorers at top schools and some people disagreed. I was exaggerating for effect but the point is still the same: DEI or Affirmative Action gives special consideration to groups WITHIN this very elite, top scoring group. You need to have impossibly high scores to get into Harvard if you're Asian, but only have very, very high scores if you're black.

Oh and this massive injustice results in a whopping 6.34% of Harvard being black. Someone call the cops!

 

[Possum Jenkins]

weren't you crying about "white flight" a few pages ago?
perhaps you should call the waaaaambulance.

Nope. I brought it up as social phenomenon.

You said "let it be" and I said that yeah, it's called white flight and it's not illegal. Waambulance not contacted.

 

[ermac88]

So you agree meritocracy is the right way to go.

In a Utopian society where there is no classicism, racism, sexism and bigotry-

Are you asking do I personally think a meritocracy would be better?

 

[Madmick]

Yes, the closer you get to the maximum the smaller number gets

The point is, 1400+ scorers are rare and comprise the top students anywhere. College Board itself groups the 1400-1600 scorers together in their formal reports. And yeah, average blacks at Harvard are in this very top group.

This whole discussion started when I brought up that DEI isn't letting in 900 scorers at top schools and some people disagreed. I was exaggerating for effect but the point is still the same: DEI or Affirmative Action gives special consideration to groups WITHIN this very elite, top scoring group. You need to have impossibly high scores to get into Harvard if you're Asian, but only have very, very high scores if you're black.

Oh and this massive injustice results in a whopping 6.34% of Harvard being black. Someone call the cops!

The point is that the schools are implementing racist policies that exhibit drastically different averages, to the tune of multiple sigma shifts, in discrimination on the basis of race.

That's the takeaway unless you're a racist asshole.

 

[Hog-train]

The NY Times article is paywalled and the study cited isn't available anymore.

Spoiler

White Students’ Unfair Advantage in Admissions

Spoiler

By Andrew Lam

• 

Credit...Wenting Li/Ontario College of Art and Design

As a Chinese-American alumnus who interviews applicants to Yale, I’m often asked one question by Asian-American students and parents: “Will being Asian hurt my chances?”

I deflect these queries, since I’m just a volunteer, not a member of the admissions committee. But I understand their concern.
A 2009 Princeton study showed Asian-Americans had to score 140 points higher on their SATs than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points higher than blacks to have the same chance of admission to leading universities. A lawsuit filed in 2014 accused Harvard of having a cap on the number of Asian students — the percentage of Asians in Harvard’s student body had remained about 16 percent to 19 percent for two decades even though the Asian-American percentage of the population had more than doubled. In 2016, the Asian American Coalition for Education filed a complaint with the Department of Education against Yale, where the Asian percentage had remained 13 percent to 16 percent for 20 years, as well as Brown and Dartmouth, urging investigation of their admissions practices for similar reasons.

There’s ample evidence that Asian-Americans are at a disadvantage in college admissions. This issue has divided Asians and others who debate the relative benefits of diversity versus meritocracy in our society.

I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.

Yes, the closer you get to the maximum the smaller number gets

The point is, 1400+ scorers are rare and comprise the top students anywhere. College Board itself groups the 1400-1600 scorers together in their formal reports. And yeah, average blacks at Harvard are in this very top group.

This whole discussion started when I brought up that DEI isn't letting in 900 scorers at top schools and some people disagreed. I was exaggerating for effect but the point is still the same: DEI or Affirmative Action gives special consideration to groups WITHIN this very elite, top scoring group. You need to have impossibly high scores to get into Harvard if you're Asian, but only have very, very high scores if you're black.

The average Asian-American admittee to Harvard had SAT scores roughly 120 points higher than blacks admitted and 50 points higher than whites. And this is a low estimate, as a third or more of Asian applicants would have scored higher than the maximum SAT score had the maximum been increased.

It's bullshit and unfair.

Oh and this massive injustice results in a whopping 6.34% of Harvard being black. Someone call the cops!

Incorrect. The percentage of black students at Harvard was 18% before affirmative action was abolished. And now it's at 14%. Which BTW is in line with their percentage of the population numbers.

 

[Hog-train]

The AEI study cited in the second link is really interesting. The med school acceptance rates seem pretty striking and gives the impression that a massive injustice is taking place. But then you look at the far right column (average scores by race) and something else comes up:

The GPA difference isn't that great. It's basically 3.5 vs 3.7. The MCAT difference is a little bigger vs Asians but considerably less vs whites. Hispanics actually having HIGHER MCAT scores than whites is really shocking and on its own a great argument for the effectiveness of these initiatives.

A 32 vs 27 MCAT score is a MASSIVE difference.

And the entire point of the affirmative action lawsuit was that ASIANS were being discriminated against vs black, Latino AND WHITE students.

And it's not like med schools are just filled to the brim with these low-achieving, black students. This PDF has med school populations by race for a 5-year span

https://www.aamc.org/media/6116/download

Just doing some rough calculations for all the years shown, blacks make up around 8% of all med students and Asians around 24%.

So what this tells is that yes, a student with very mediocre scores like, say, a 3.2 GPA and 24 MCAT has a much, much, much higher chance of being admitted to med school if he's black, there's so few of these type of students to begin with that you can't really argue that quality of doctors produced is reduced.

All of this is completely irrelevant because it is simply UNFAIR and discriminatory.

 

[nhbbear]

I was recently a dei hire, well sort of. It was for a domestic violence and human trafficking advocate. I crushed my interview where I had to give a presentation on human trafficking. I even pointed out the elephant in the room by saying “look, I realize that I am an out of the box candidate by being a white male in an entirely female company, but that means I bring different options and viewpoints. For example, when I speak to police departments to educate them on what human trafficking looks like, being a retired cop and male will boost my expertise of the topic and they may respond favorably.

I have since started that job and it is weird working in an office with 17 females and me being the only male. Most non profits seem to be mostly female in my experience. It is a very woke field. We did a conference on Wednesday and I was the only male in attendance and this was state wide.

I do think that had I not crushed the presentation, I wouldn’t have had a shot but I have them little change. They had 30 interviews for that position and I was very much overqualified for it having a masters and I teach at a local university, so I have experience speaking in front of a group of people, which is the focus.

 

[Belaya Smert]

LOL!!

As opposed to, how its been for the majority of the US history of racial caste system?

Where it was a, meritocracy?

Well, It ceases to be a meritocracy if you exclude the most successful candidates based on race as some sort of disqualifying criteria.
Where there is quota there is perceived equity we treat as equality.

 

[fica]

In a Utopian society where there is no classicism, racism, sexism and bigotry-

Are you asking do I personally think a meritocracy would be better?

blcks and white liberals do not want utopian sociaty they want what they have now and what they push for i just watched video does reverse racism exist asking blacks lol. people who benefit the most from so called racism talk dont believe anybody else can be vcitim of racism crazy ha. same ting with white liberals who created their income from finding racism against black for profit do they want their income to dry up

 

[SuperAlly]

blcks and white liberals do not want utopian sociaty they want what they have now and what they push for i just watched video does reverse racism exist asking blacks lol. people who benefit the most from so called racism talk dont believe anybody else can be vcitim of racism crazy ha. same ting with white liberals who created their income from finding racism against black for profit do they want their income to dry up

Reverse racism is made up nonsense

There is already a term for when people are prejudiced against those of a different race. It’s called racism. White people can be racist. Black people can be racist. Asian people can be racist. Anyone can be racist. We don’t need new terms to describe different forms of racism or to somehow diminish racism exhibited by black people.

For example, sinister clearly harbours a lot of racist feelings against white people

 

[Jack Reacheround]

You morons are, again, missing the point and making DEI into something it’s not so that you can have something easy to attack.

Here’s all it is: Checking your implicit bias.

When most white people, like myself, are hiring people, and they get a couple of candidates who are different but equally qualified, and one of those candidates is black but the other is white, who do you think they usually hire?

Not the black candidate. The same goes for other groups, like women, Latinos, etc.

DEI just means that maybe a black guy won’t have to work twice as hard to get a job a white gay would normally get.

I can see why you guys would have a problem with that given most of you are subhuman. But go on believing what you want. It feels better to have a boogeyman.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

I can see why you guys would have a problem with that given most of you are subhuman.

What an unhinged hate-filled psychopath.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Spoiler

White Students’ Unfair Advantage in Admissions

Spoiler

By Andrew Lam

• 

Credit...Wenting Li/Ontario College of Art and Design

As a Chinese-American alumnus who interviews applicants to Yale, I’m often asked one question by Asian-American students and parents: “Will being Asian hurt my chances?”

I deflect these queries, since I’m just a volunteer, not a member of the admissions committee. But I understand their concern.
A 2009 Princeton study showed Asian-Americans had to score 140 points higher on their SATs than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points higher than blacks to have the same chance of admission to leading universities. A lawsuit filed in 2014 accused Harvard of having a cap on the number of Asian students — the percentage of Asians in Harvard’s student body had remained about 16 percent to 19 percent for two decades even though the Asian-American percentage of the population had more than doubled. In 2016, the Asian American Coalition for Education filed a complaint with the Department of Education against Yale, where the Asian percentage had remained 13 percent to 16 percent for 20 years, as well as Brown and Dartmouth, urging investigation of their admissions practices for similar reasons.

There’s ample evidence that Asian-Americans are at a disadvantage in college admissions. This issue has divided Asians and others who debate the relative benefits of diversity versus meritocracy in our society.

I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.

That Inside Higher Ed study they cite doesn't come up anymore. And that's a shame because I really want to know how they came up with that mammoth 450-point disparity among black and Asian students.

The gap between ALL black and Asian students is 300 points

https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-total-group-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf

Blacks' average score is 926 so that would mean that Asians have to score a 1376 to be considered the same. High 1300s is about on par with the overall average at "leading universities." So there's black kids with literally average SAT scores attending the same schools as kids with high 1300s??

The average Asian-American admittee to Harvard had SAT scores roughly 120 points higher than blacks admitted and 50 points higher than whites. And this is a low estimate, as a third or more of Asian applicants would have scored higher than the maximum SAT score had the maximum been increased.

It's bullshit and unfair.

Yeah, you can argue that Asians specifically are getting shafted by these initiatives and some adjustments should be made. At the same time, it's not like they're getting completely shut out. They still make up either the plurality or are a close second (depending what data you choose) of the students at Harvard.

But the overall effect of DEI is still positive, imo. You're selecting brilliant students no matter what and just giving groups that are vastly underrepresented extra consideration.

Incorrect. The percentage of black students at Harvard was 18% before affirmative action was abolished. And now it's at 14%. Which BTW is in line with their percentage of the population numbers.

I was using this data

https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university

But I see that other places have that 14% you're mentioning.

 

[Hog-train]

That Inside Higher Ed study they cite doesn't come up anymore. And that's a shame because I really want to know how they came up with that mammoth 450-point disparity among black and Asian students.

I can't seem to find the study anymore, but the 2009 Princeton study was referenced by multiple publications.

The gap between ALL black and Asian students is 300 points

https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-total-group-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf

Blacks' average score is 926 so that would mean that Asians have to score a 1376 to be considered the same. High 1300s is about on par with the overall average at "leading universities." So there's black kids with literally average SAT scores attending the same schools as kids with high 1300s??

This was only for Princeton or Ivy league school admission. Forgot which.

Yeah, you can argue that Asians specifically are getting shafted by these initiatives and some adjustments should be made. At the same time, it's not like they're getting completely shut out. They still make up either the plurality or are a close second (depending what data you choose) of the students at Harvard.

They 100% are getting shafted. In the affirmative action lawsuit, Harvard tried (really hard) to keep their own internal study out of evidence.

Their OWN internal study found Asians were being discriminated against in admissions. They were forced to reveal it by the judge.

But the overall effect of DEI is still positive, imo. You're selecting brilliant students no matter what and just giving groups that are vastly underrepresented extra consideration.

I was using this data

https://datausa.io/profile/university/harvard-university

But I see that other places have that 14% you're mentioning.

The Asian students that didn't get in despite better qualifications would beg to differ.

And why is it Asian students had to score higher than WHITE STUDENTS ALSO? White students are the majority and not disadvantaged like black and Latino students. Yet the Asian students had to score higher than them as well - despite white students making up the majority of the school population.

They did DEI on the backs of Asian students and didn't penalize the white students.

One other major point.

Asians are being lumped into ONE HUGE MONOLITHIC group even though they're really diverse and make up more than 50% of the world's population. Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Kazakhstanis, Indonesians, Benaglis, etc.

They're being treated as one single group that's all the same. That in and of itself is racist.

 

[ferrisjso]

Yes, the closer you get to the maximum the smaller number gets

The point is, 1400+ scorers are rare and comprise the top students anywhere. College Board itself groups the 1400-1600 scorers together in their formal reports. And yeah, average blacks at Harvard are in this very top group.

This whole discussion started when I brought up that DEI isn't letting in 900 scorers at top schools and some people disagreed. I was exaggerating for effect but the point is still the same: DEI or Affirmative Action gives special consideration to groups WITHIN this very elite, top scoring group. You need to have impossibly high scores to get into Harvard if you're Asian, but only have very, very high scores if you're black.

Oh and this massive injustice results in a whopping 6.34% of Harvard being black. Someone call the cops!

This is a concept the anti AA or DEI people can not get through their skulls. In their minds DEI is about giving someone unqualified a position because of their race. No its being used to filter through people who were already hyper qualified.

 

[SuperAlly]

You morons are, again, missing the point and making DEI into something it’s not so that you can have something easy to attack.

Here’s all it is: Checking your implicit bias.

When most white people, like myself, are hiring people, and they get a couple of candidates who are different but equally qualified, and one of those candidates is black but the other is white, who do you think they usually hire?

Not the black candidate. The same goes for other groups, like women, Latinos, etc.

DEI just means that maybe a black guy won’t have to work twice as hard to get a job a white gay would normally get.

I can see why you guys would have a problem with that given most of you are subhuman. But go on believing what you want. It feels better to have a boogeyman.

So white guys are above straight black dudes according to your post?

What's the hierarchy here? I think we need to know.

 

[SuperAlly]

What an unhinged hate-filled psychopath.

"Check your implicit bias" bro

I think we know anyone who uses such phrases without irony is clearly a raging bellend

 

[RoastBeast]

You morons are, again, missing the point and making DEI into something it’s not so that you can have something easy to attack.

Here’s all it is: Checking your implicit bias.

When most white people, like myself, are hiring people, and they get a couple of candidates who are different but equally qualified, and one of those candidates is black but the other is white, who do you think they usually hire?

Not the black candidate. The same goes for other groups, like women, Latinos, etc.

DEI just means that maybe a black guy won’t have to work twice as hard to get a job a white gay would normally get.

I can see why you guys would have a problem with that given most of you are subhuman. But go on believing what you want. It feels better to have a boogeyman.

This is not a good argument at all. It's just a made up scenario involving a racist hiring manager that you conjured up out of thin air.

Here's what reality is. Our laws currently say it is illegal to hire someone based on their immutable characteristics. DEI goes against that and pushes hiring people based on their immutable characteristics by pretending like those characteristics are a merit, just like education, work experience and job skills.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

This was only for Princeton or Ivy league school admission. Forgot which.

That wouldn't make sense because we have the data for Harvard and it's only a 120-130 point difference. You and I have both referenced this during our exchanges. Scores for the less selective Ivies are still only 10-20 points below the top ones like Harvard and Princeton.

450 points just doesn't fit anywhere

The Asian students that didn't get in despite better qualifications would beg to differ.

And why is it Asian students had to score higher than WHITE STUDENTS ALSO? White students are the majority and not disadvantaged like black and Latino students. Yet the Asian students had to score higher than them as well - despite white students making up the majority of the school population.

They did DEI on the backs of Asian students and didn't penalize the white students.

Yeah, they would beg to differ because they didn't get into Harvard or Princeton like their parents have unhealthily pressured them to attend since they were in pre-K and had to settle for Northwestern, Duke, or Georgetown. I'm not shedding tears for them.

Study after study after study show that SAT scores correlate almost perfectly with family income and wealth.

So to be nitpicky about SAT scores and filter out anyone that strays too far from the mean will effectively filter out anyone that's not very wealthy. So these institutions that are already notorious for being the playground of the super elite... will become even more elite. Get out of the way, middle-class black dude, here comes yet another Asian son of an executive mom and physician dad.

One other major point.

Asians are being lumped into ONE HUGE MONOLITHIC group even though they're really diverse and make up more than 50% of the world's population. Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Kazakhstanis, Indonesians, Benaglis, etc.

They're being treated as one single group that's all the same. That in and of itself is racist.

I mean, you gotta draw the line somewhere, just for the sake of practicality.

Are you gonna have a category for every country in the world? If so, why not break it down further? An indigenous Mexican from a small village in the southern part of the country is gonna live a very different life than rich, white Mexican from Monterrey, yet they'll both get the "Mexican" category.

Having all Asians in one giant category carries problems but it's hard to come up with viable alternatives. Maybe break it down to a handful of subgroups: West Asian (Middle East, Central Asia) South Asian, East Asian, and SE Asian? There's just no easy answers.