The real test will be what happens to Asian admissions. They were by far the most discriminated against in the process.
Languages comprised of logographic scripts instead of an alphabet has shown to provide the native speakers an edge when it come to STEM courses. It’s quite intriguing to me this is the case.
An alphabet isn’t making the average Asian sat score significantly higher than all other groups.
You’re right, but the STEM field is pretty specific and not too general. Logographic scripts have proven to increase one’s aptitude in math and science. SAT’s love both math and science, plus writing too. Writing is also a big part of STEM, especially if you want a good chance at receiving grant money to fund your research. If a scientists wants to have better chances at being awarded the initial or additional grant funding, writing well becomes almost as important as the research itself.
Edit: I’m envious as math and science were tough out the gate for me. Nonetheless, the Asian community has 100% seen and increase in discrimination and that does suck to see.
Yeah, I have no idea where you get that notion that somehow the alphabet is relevant here. This sounds more like a case of correlation than causation to me. Yes, numbers are more consistent in East Asian languages (I can’t speak for the rest of Asia, I’m only familiar with Chinese, Japanese, and Korean), but the real magic is in how much emphasis their cultures put on education generally and math specifically.
My spouse is from E. Asia, and if they ever got something wrong in class, the teacher would physically reprimand them (i.e. smack their knuckles with a ruler), which was very embarrassing. If they got poor feedback from a teacher, their parents would physically reprimand them (e.g. spanking).
I am from the US and the culture is very different here. If I got a question wrong, the teacher would call on someone else. If I got poor feedback from school, my parents would express how disappointed they are and life would go on. They also went to school for ~10 hours/day, with the last few hours being after school tutoring and whatnot.
I was emotionally better off, but the only motivation I had to do well in school was internal. I happened to really like math, so I did well. I had plenty of friends who didn’t, and they did poorly. After school tutoring wasn’t really a thing unless you were at risk of not progressing to the next school year, which was pretty rare.
In many parts of E. Asia, doing poorly just isn’t an option, because you will be physically and emotionally reprimanded until you improve. I don’t find that healthy, but it’s apparently quite effective. I’m guessing much of the rest of Asia has similar culture (esp. Russia, I had a Russian friend in school so I can speak from second hand experience).
Good. Using race to determine admissions eligibility is, well, racist. Sorry, facts. If it’s not 100% merit based then it’s a compete sham. Using race for anything is simply wrong and goes against the very idea of NOT judging someone by their race. Can’t believe it took this long. Now, get rid of affirmative action in job hiring, promotions and everything else.
This article is just a heavily slanted opinion. Oh and there is no reason to go to an Ivy League school anyways. A local community college or state school is just fine. Or, better yet, try a trade school And make great money with union benefits. Zero debt. No wasted time taking pointless classes.
Poor communities have worse public schools, fewer educational programs, etc. They have less access to education and thus have a harder time to excel in it. Affirmative action from my understanding was a way to offset the systemic racism favoring rich white communities. I don’t think it’s a good solution but removing it without a decade of solving the underlying issues and seeing the first kids with equal chances make it into university is just a horrible thought. EDIT: typo
Why not use income and where you live rather than race, then?
I thought those programs existed as well?
Yes, but what does race account for that income and location do not? Unless you’re a racist, not very much.
I think similar logic to the paradox of tolerance may be applicable here…
It wasn’t a perfect solution, but directly correcting the proportions affected by the systemic problem (using same or similar discriminators as the actual problem) was progress in the right direction. That bigot’s opinion goes the exact wrong direction; the goal should have been to reach a point where there isn’t enough scarcity in higher education for anyone to “lose out”. In other words, the policy should try to make itself unnecessary.
I don’t claim to have the solution to systemic racism, but I wouldn’t be surprised if a reversal of the last half-century’s anti-education trends did a lot of the legwork on that by itself. And if there are still systemic issues to address, hey! Now you have a whole lot more educated folks to help figure out what to do from there.
The solution should have been, and still should be, fixing access to schools at the K-12 level. I’m a huge proponent of school choice, but unfortunately that usually ends up just meaning wealthier people get to choose and poorer people get stuck with whatever has bus service.
So my solution is:
- get rid of school buses entirely in larger cities
- require cities in larger schools to ensure mass transit exists to all schools in the city
- provide free transit passes to all students in the city
- allow students to select their schools with the guidance of a school counselor if parents choose to not get involved
- allow schools to offer apprenticeship programs during the last two years of K-12 school in lieu of a college-track program
- allow college debt to be discharged in bankruptcy
This would hopefully do a few things:
- give kids some control over their education
- provide flexibility for kids who decide they college isn’t for them
- allow a reset of college ends up not working out for them
The goal shouldn’t be getting as many kids into college as possible, but preparing kids for the workforce and post-education life. College is certainly a good path for many, but also it’s not for everyone, and the education system should reflect that.
Basing any assistance on race is a terrible policy that will lead to countless kids falling through the cracks because they weren’t the right color and live in the wrong location. That’s unfair to those kids and it’s clear as day. If wealth inequality is the problem, target wealth inequality, don’t slap on some half-assed racial band-aid.
They have a “systemic” culture problem too that only they can fix. There isnt a Govt. program for that though. It has to come from within. There are success stories coming from poorer communities which means it CAN be done. Millions of people from all walks have escaped poverty and while they may not all end up at Harvard, they’ve done quite well for themselves & didnt use some “fake” merit system to get there. Lifes not fair and wealthy people always have advantages. Its not a race thing either. Rich black people’s kids are better off than poor or middle class white kids too. Thats life. Put effort in and sacrifice a bit. Then, you reap the rewards.
This country has more opportunities than anywhere to make something of yourself. Color is irrelevant and only used as a “victim” ploy by politicians.
You sound like a cunt.
I am what I eat. 😜
Remarkable that it only took one reply for the mask to come all the way off.
I hope someday the universe puts you on the receiving end of some equally bigoted bullshit so you get at least a chance at self-awareness.
Relax. Why are you so angry?
This is explicitly a Nazi argument btw
Not using race to determine college admissions versus merit is a Nazi thing? Is that what you’re going with? I see you’ve clearly thought this through. You also must have no knowledge of how Nazis actually worked. Try Google.
Okay, there is so much to unpack here. Poorer communities have a few success stories so they don’t need the same support? Rich people will always have it easier so no need to do anything about it? “They” have a culture problem? Sounds like victim blaming to me.
It feels like you are not arguing in good faith so I will withdraw from this discussion.
Arguing in good faith? You mean fanning the flames of the “victim” mentality. Thats fine. You choose to be a victim or take control of your life. Thats it.
