![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Speaking of UMich law school...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=1&u=/nm/20030623/ts_nm/court_race_dc
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A divided U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) upheld on Monday the University of Michigan's affirmative action policy that favors minorities who apply to its law school, but struck down the program for its undergraduate college.
In the undergraduate case, black, Hispanic and Native American applicants get 20 extra points out of a possible 150 points under a selection index that considers academics, test scores and other factors, including race.
In the law school case, the admissions process does not involve a point system, but the university seeks the enrollment of a "critical mass" of minority students, which has ranged between 10 percent and 17 percent of each class.
That makes no sense to me - a 'quota' is preferred to a leveling point matrix? I'm thrilled they held onto it, though sometimes I find myself wishing I could believe the myth that race issues are in the past and what we really see now are socioeconomic issues being masked with the race card. I felt creepy about being admitted to UMich while other schools w/o those programs did not admit me. Go white hispanic cross-dressing boy!
BUT http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&ncid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20030623/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_affirmative_action
"Michigan's undergraduate school used a 150-point index to screen applicants. The 20 points awarded to minorities was more than the school awarded for some measures of academic excellence, writing ability or leadership skills. Outstanding athletes also got 20 points, as did impoverished applicants. "
test
test
Oh, so it's ok to discriminate for jocks, but not minorities? See no one minds quotas and discrimination, but the basis for it determines whether they support it or not. Do they not like the system itself, or their rank within it? Imagine how unpopular a gay diversity program would be, but how acceptable a N-S-E-W quota system would seem.
EDIT MORE: I can't get it to accept my < /i > command on the last P grr
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A divided U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) upheld on Monday the University of Michigan's affirmative action policy that favors minorities who apply to its law school, but struck down the program for its undergraduate college.
In the undergraduate case, black, Hispanic and Native American applicants get 20 extra points out of a possible 150 points under a selection index that considers academics, test scores and other factors, including race.
In the law school case, the admissions process does not involve a point system, but the university seeks the enrollment of a "critical mass" of minority students, which has ranged between 10 percent and 17 percent of each class.
That makes no sense to me - a 'quota' is preferred to a leveling point matrix? I'm thrilled they held onto it, though sometimes I find myself wishing I could believe the myth that race issues are in the past and what we really see now are socioeconomic issues being masked with the race card. I felt creepy about being admitted to UMich while other schools w/o those programs did not admit me. Go white hispanic cross-dressing boy!
BUT http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&ncid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20030623/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_affirmative_action
"Michigan's undergraduate school used a 150-point index to screen applicants. The 20 points awarded to minorities was more than the school awarded for some measures of academic excellence, writing ability or leadership skills. Outstanding athletes also got 20 points, as did impoverished applicants. "
test
test
Oh, so it's ok to discriminate for jocks, but not minorities? See no one minds quotas and discrimination, but the basis for it determines whether they support it or not. Do they not like the system itself, or their rank within it? Imagine how unpopular a gay diversity program would be, but how acceptable a N-S-E-W quota system would seem.
EDIT MORE: I can't get it to accept my < /i > command on the last P grr
no subject
Even if all economic factors are equal, from a statistical standpoinf, the black kid is likely to have faced more obsticles. If the white kid was raised by a black family in a black neighborhood, then it might be more comperable. It would be lovely if we could quantify the ardships faced by each individual student and adjust their scores accordingly, but for now the best we can do is shoot for the averages.
Personally, I don't think we should even contemplate doing away with "preferential treatment" for minorities in admissions until we stop giving preferential treatment to legacies, people whose daddies make big contributions, etc...
Re:
I think they are two seperate issues that shouldn't be connected.
You are probably right that from a statistical point of view that the black kid faced more obstacles through life. It is of course a generalization, but as you say without a "score" of hardship maybe we have no other way but to go on generalizations. I hate generalizations though!
no subject
All college admissions are generalizations. They can't know how well any individual will succeed in college, so they make assumptions based on how much the individual resembles those who have succeeded in the past.
Re: