Support NeoGAF

[ezrarh]

That's true. I think some schools now do make a differentiation between the types of Asians, which happens to be more about socioeconomic status (again).

I'm not against AA. I don't have a problem with it. If you can get into a school, and you can compete with your fellow students, then good for you. The people that shouldn't have made it in will wash out anyway.

(BTW, I feel like I know way more kids from 'richer' families flunk out of college than from poorer families, probably because the poorer kids actually had to work really hard to get to where they were, whereas many of the rich kids, once away from their nagging parents, didn't have self-discipline and drive. So.. it balances out IMO.)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not denying the evidence the Asians have to work harder to get into more prestigious schools. It's also the same in the corporate world. I think Asians should definitely be treated the same as whites in admissions but from the data being shown, it clearly is not. I don't think that means we should get rid of AA though, and you seem to agree with that. I think it's definitely a problem just like how blacks and hispanics are discriminated against in many aspects of society. I'm just not well versed in the topic enough to suggest a solution. However, complaining about it is something people should do especially if it's an undeniable fact.

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

No? I don't know why you're assuming I think the worst of asian american students. I don't think I've ever given that impression. Frankly I find it surprising and it seems like you're taking your frustration out on me.

edit:



I said well rounded student body because a good number of black students to white to asian to whatever is good. It has nothing to do with the individuals.

What is a well rounded student body? Who gets to decide that? It's tough to say. To get into these elite institutions, you have the play the game, and that means GPA, standardized test scores, extracurriculars, service, leadership, athletics, etc etc. Now, there absolutely should be handicaps, i.e. affirmative action, to account for the fact that not everyone gets to play the game at the same starting point.

I absolutely believe that there should be more African American and Hispanic American students in these elite colleges. Should there, however, be a limit on the number of Asian Americans at these colleges? The Cal system, Caltech, among others say no. The Ivy Leagues say yes.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Yeah, tone-policing is really important in these kinds of threads. It completely changes the entire argument. /s

I'm just an Asian-American who is sick and tired of hearing "well-rounded" in college applications, often with the implication that Asian-American students are NOT well-rounded and only care about studying, and that's why we don't get in (not the discrimination faced by Asian students).

Also, given the past discussion you've been having on the previous page, where you quoted AA's effects on *white* people, when the discussion was mostly, at that point, about *Asians*, it did make me wonder. So sorry if you weren't subconsciously implying anything. It looked like that to me.

I'm not tone policing. You're attributing all sorts of opinions to me which I never implied. You're taking your past experiences with prejudiced individuals and putting me in that same category. Reread my posts. I never once said asian students weren't well-rounded. I never once said that they didn't have to work harder to be equal with white students. All I disagreed with was a poster and his assumption with how AA works. And again I posted that because the rate for blacks being accepted was really high and I assumed that was because

a) not a lot of blacks apply to med school

b) universities want a diverse (i.e. well rounded) student body. It had nothing to do with discrediting asian discrimination.

 

[kirblar]

'MERICA!

Heaven forbid the schools actually hire enough people to give themselves some legitimate time to look through applications.

I know the sister school at the university (which got far fewer applicants) would take about 15 minutes or so per application.

Part of the problem is, OK, so admissions offices get to try to deal with all the systemic and economic issues related to race and determine who should be given an opportunity to move forward taking all these issues into account...based on test scores, a fluffed up application (dear lord everyone does it), and maybe a essay? Hell, some of the schools (Purdue for instance) don't even have essays.

You can't drop all of that untangling on the heads of a tiny group of people and be like "OK SWEET RACISM IS DONE YO YOU GOT THIS COVERED RIGHT". Kind of dumb.

There is this belief that college admissions is this intricate process with tons of thought and nuance plotted out into every step of looking through someone's application and understanding each part of it and that factors have been laid out and codified to make it as fair and thorough as possible.

That is a giant lie. Especially something primarily done by either student workers or recent grads. The person who introduced me to all of this is going to get her Ph.D in Public Policy / Education because she was appalled at the entire process and how thoroughly ridiculous and unfair it was.

As an adult: "Oh, that's what that episode of DS9 with the previously unknown Dax host was actually about"

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

What makes you think this is a valid assumption?

If you have more of one race applying, on what basis do you think that those with the same GPA/MCAT scores as another race are somehow less qualified on average?

I'm saying assuming every group has the same percentage of qualified people, the closer you approach the group's total numbers (that apply), the smaller the percentage of qualified people you get.

Anyway, the main issue seems not to be AA in general, but how AA treats asians. For some reason this never seems to be the main topic of these debates. For instance, why sue for the practice of AA when it has its positive benefits, when it would make much more sense to address the parts of it that negatively affect groups (Asians) for no justifiable reason?

 

[CapNBritain]

I said well rounded student body because a good number of black students to white to asian to whatever is good. It has nothing to do with the individuals.

What I was complaining about was the assumption that all people under the Asian banner are the same, which I get that you are not doing. But limiting the number of Asians to get a more diverse community is pretty terrible when you consider how diverse the Asian label really is, both individually and compared to other ethnicities.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not denying the evidence the Asians have to work harder to get into more prestigious schools. It's also the same in the corporate world. I think Asians should definitely be treated the same as whites in admissions but from the data being shown, it clearly is not. I don't think that means we should get rid of AA though, and you seem to agree with that. I think it's definitely a problem just like how blacks and hispanics are discriminated against in many aspects of society. I'm just not well versed in the topic enough to suggest a solution. However, complaining about it is something people should do especially if it's an undeniable fact.

I still don't see anyone laying a good case for why AA is better than a pure socio-economic policy. And yes, I read your links Foxy Fox, even the one about the 6 myths of AA. I suppose the issue is what you're trying to solve. If you're trying to counter systemic discrimination against minorities (with positive effects going mostly to blacks and hispanics and negatives to Asians, with everyone else on a spectrum), then AA is probably the best solution. If you're trying to make sure that those who are disadvantaged in general get help, then why AA seems to fail pretty badly. And I think that a socio-economic policy will help address racial gaps, maybe not the extent that AA does, but it will do so on a more merit and need based manner while disadvantaging no one.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

'MERICA!

Heaven forbid the schools actually hire enough people to give themselves some legitimate time to look through applications.

I know the sister school at the university (which got far fewer applicants) would take about 15 minutes or so per application.

Part of the problem is, OK, so admissions offices get to try to deal with all the systemic and economic issues related to race and determine who should be given an opportunity to move forward taking all these issues into account...based on test scores, a fluffed up application (dear lord everyone does it), and maybe a essay? Hell, some of the schools (Purdue for instance) don't even have essays.

You can't drop all of that untangling on the heads of a tiny group of people and be like "OK SWEET RACISM IS DONE YO YOU GOT THIS COVERED RIGHT". Kind of dumb.

There is this belief that college admissions is this intricate process with tons of thought and nuance plotted out into every step of looking through someone's application and understanding each part of it and that factors have been laid out and codified to make it as fair and thorough as possible.

That is a giant lie. Especially something primarily done by either student workers or recent grads. The person who introduced me to all of this is going to get her Ph.D in Public Policy / Education because she was appalled at the entire process and how thoroughly ridiculous and unfair it was.

This should be made public knowledge so more people understand that it's not the very concept of AA that's flawed, but the clumsy and borderline illegal way admissions try to apply it.

 

[Cybit]

As an adult: "Oh, that's what that episode of DS9 with the previously unknown Dax host was actually about"

I'm about to start binge-ing DS9; is there an episode I'm going to see and just facepalm the entire way through with respect to this discussion?

 

[jtb]

What is a well rounded student body? Who gets to decide that? It's tough to say. To get into these elite institutions, you have the play the game, and that means GPA, standardized test scores, extracurriculars, service, leadership, athletics, etc etc. Now, there absolutely should be handicaps, i.e. affirmative action, to account for the fact that not everyone gets to play the game at the same starting point.

I absolutely believe that there should be more African American and Hispanic American students in these elite colleges. Should there, however, be a limit on the number of Asian Americans at these colleges? The Cal system, Caltech, among others say no. The Ivy Leagues say yes.

Asians make up 15% of California's population but only 5% of America's total population. Cal system is... what, around 40% Asian? I went to Columbia for undergrad (which now has AA champion Bollinger at the helm); current undergrad Asian population is 20%. I think the difference is overstated once you take into account Cal system are state schools; I'm not following the logic that the Cal system proves anything one way or another re: affirmative action accepting more or less Asians.

I'd also be interested to see the splits between Asian Americans vs international Asians at these schools (particularly Cal, given international students would have to pay like... 3x the tuition I think)... a lot of various factors pushing admissions rates in various directions

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

I'm not tone policing. You're attributing all sorts of opinions to me which I never implied. You're taking your past experiences with prejudiced individuals and putting me in that same category. Reread my posts. I never once said asian students weren't well-rounded. I never once said that they didn't have to work harder to be equal with white students. All I disagreed with was a poster and his assumption with how AA works. And again I posted that because the rate for blacks being accepted was really high and I assumed that was because

a) not a lot of blacks apply to med school

b) universities want a diverse (i.e. well rounded) student body. It had nothing to do with discrediting asian discrimination.

Again, I think we're arguing based on misunderstanding. I absolutely believe that there should be more black/Hispanic minorities at elite colleges, med schools, corporate leadership, etc etc.

The issue is that a lot of these institutions cite that they want a "well rounded" and "diverse" student body and cite that as a reason to limit the number of Asian American matriculants, aka a quota system. If the Asian American percentage at ivy league schools grew from 15% to 40%, would that really be less diverse? Seems like it would be more diverse to me...but the demographic that would really suffer would be the white majority. Which is why the leadership cites affirmative action as the reason to uphold these quotas. For them, the question isn't admitting more Asian students at the cost of black/Hispanic students. It's admitting more Asian students at the cost of white students.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Naw I get what you're saying.

I also do think that the historic, institutionalized racism against blacks, and the more recent but just as damaging racism against Hispanics, as well the socioeconomic status of many of them, are all factors that should contribute to affirmative action being in place.

I am bitching about how Asian-Americans need to do better than anyone (and by this I mean white people, primarily), to even been seen on the same level, academically.

Not sure if people in this thread are interpreting me comparing Asians to other minorities. I'm not. I'm not even going to go into the model minority myth, except for stating that the model minority myth hurts other minorities just as much as Asians.



Your assumptions are wrong.

Ignoring the fact that only 5% of the US population is Asian, making it statistically unlikely for Asian-Americans to be the "largest group" of applicants, you've also managed to disregard all the graphs, not just for medical school, but also college admissions in general.

Im not disagreeing with anything you have said but I did find more recent numbers. I saw those pie charts that you posted before I asked that but the data is from 10 years ago so I didn't think it was necessarily salient.

Three out of four physicians identified themselves as white, non-Hispanic, while 3.8 percent were black, non-Hispanic, 5.3 percent were Hispanic, and 17.2 percent were Asian or other races. However, among physicians under age 40, about two-thirds were white and 33 percent were minority—black (4%), Hispanic (5.4%), and Asian or other race (24%) (findings not shown).

 

[Fuzzery]

I'm saying assuming every group has the same percentage of qualified people, the closer you approach the group's total numbers (that apply), the smaller the percentage of qualified people you get.

Anyway, the main issue seems not to be AA in general, but how AA treats asians. For some reason this never seems to be the main topic of these debates. For instance, why sue for the practice of AA when it has its positive benefits, when it would make much more sense to address the parts of it that negatively affect groups (Asians) for no justifiable reason?

This is a faulty assumption though. You could say that every group with the GPA and MCAT, similar extracurriculars or whatever, have the same percentage of qualified people, but not as a whole.

 

[CapNBritain]

Again, I think we're arguing based on misunderstanding. I absolutely believe that there should be more black/Hispanic minorities at elite colleges, med schools, corporate leadership, etc etc.

The issue is that a lot of these institutions cite that they want a "well rounded" and "diverse" student body and cite that as a reason to limit the number of Asian American matriculants, aka a quota system. If the Asian American percentage at ivy league schools grew from 15% to 40%, would that really be less diverse? Seems like it would be more diverse to me...but the demographic that would really suffer would be the white majority. Which is why the leadership cites affirmative action as the reason to uphold these quotas. For them, the question isn't admitting more Asian students at the cost of black/Hispanic students. It's admitting more Asian students at the cost of white students.

This is what I'm saying. A jump from 15% to 40% Asian does not necessarily mean less diversity. That's because Asians are not all the same and are more diverse than any other ethnicity.

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

Asians make up 15% of California's population but only 5% of America's total population. Cal system is... what, around 40% Asian? I went to Columbia for undergrad; current undergrad Asian population is 20%. I think the difference is overstated once you take into account Cal system are state schools; I'm not following the logic that the Cal system proves anything one way or another re: affirmative action accepting more or less Asians.

Here's the evidence: From 1990 to 2010, the population of Asian Americans in the US doubled from 3% to 6% of the population. However, at Ivy League schools including Columbia, the percentage of Asian American students has not changed from that 15-20%. In contrast, in race-blind schools like the Cal system and CalTech, the proportion of Asian American students has grown in proportion to the US population, from 20 to 40%. This is a clear indicator that there is some kind of limit, i.e. a quota, preventing the demographic of Asian students at Ivy League schools from growing.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Your assumptions are wrong.

Ignoring the fact that only 5% of the US population is Asian, making it statistically unlikely for Asian-Americans to be the "largest group" of applicants, you've also managed to disregard all the graphs, not just for medical school, but also college admissions in general.

Actually, when you pointed out only 5% of the US was asian, I was ready to concede, but some UC schools are pretty open about their admissions and that clearly isn't the case with them...

http://opa.berkeley.edu/uc-berkeley-fall-enrollment-data

So, just looking at undergrads we have

White: 7,162
Chinese + Filipino + Japanese + Korean + Vietnamese: 8026

And that's ignoring their Other Asian, South Asian (I'm assumed a lot of Indian), and International (which probably have a proportion of Asians as well)

 

[Cybit]

This should be made public knowledge so more people understand that it's not the very concept of AA that's flawed, but the clumsy and borderline illegal way admissions try to apply it.

Agree; for some reasons, the people I meet tend to end up in some of the most byzantine and flat out messed up fields (medical sales & college applications) that are basically hidden from public view.

I could believe that admissions vary from school to school; I imagine smaller schools might have more time; some schools actually interview prospective students. The school I helped with has high 5 figure applications per year (I was basically asked by a friend to perform some statistical studies on their applicant data and tie it into their performance at the university. Also, wow, they are strict on the permissions for their data; at least I know that data is safe), so I get why they're in the hosed category. Fundamentally, you're trying to tie the entirety of someone's life in many cases down to a couple of pages of stats and maybe an essay.

The problem with AA comes back not to its design but its purpose; it currently gets used as a "make-up" for the systemic power imbalances that influence someone's education growth for 17+ years. There's no standard way to "apply" AA; because everyone knows that'd be impossible to do, so the schools are left to fend for themselves on that front. We are still unfortunately barely at the point where we can try to determine its direct long-term influence (we have correlative data, but not enough to start forming causation) and whether it even works, or whether the benefit from AA is more or less pissing in the wind compared to the influence that is society.

I don't hold this against the schools; they're being told that they have to deal with years of systemic racism in some wishy washy undefined way. What did people think was going to happen? That same systemic racism promptly rears its head after folks are admitted, and no one wants to spend the time or energy (or frankly, money), to try to see the long-term impacts of AA. I'm frustrated with AA because it ends up being the excuse everyone uses to justify not actually giving a crap.

 

[esms]

American schools don't need less affirmative action, they need more of it. Living in Philly (44% black, 36% white according to 2012 census), most of the school I attend now should be black. Truth is, they only make up 6.5% of the total population, whereas whites make up 56.3% of all students (full time, part time).

This doesn't apply only to students, though. I've had around 3 black professors throughout my 5 years doing my undergrad. That's fucking shameful. And I'm not saying hire some random awful black teachers to make the numbers look good, but c'mon, there's gotta be black professors out there looking for work in Philly.

Real quick question: If a person is a beneficiary of affirmative action, are they eligible for any special financial aid? I feel like fiscal well-being of different races has something to do with the disparity. Also, is race a question on FAFSA forms?

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

I thought you what you read, and you know.. discrimination against Asians makes sense if you look at it from an AA point.

If it were only merit based, then more Asian students would be admitted at the cost of all other students- white, black, and brown.

So, to be fair, if we are going to discriminate, we're going to have put quotas on all race. Quotas don't just mean at least x amount of people. It also means, at max, x amount of people.

Unless you mean, we'll reserve 25% of the school for black/brown/red people, and Asians and whites can battle it out for the remaining 75%.

I would reconsider this line of thought.

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

That's always something I wondered, too. However, most international Asian students I have met do tend to blow the Asian-American students at that same school out of the water when it comes to academics. I suspect that has to do with the fact that the American school system is pretty bad before college.



I thought you what you read, and you know.. discrimination against Asians makes sense if you look at it from an AA point.

If it were only merit based, then more Asian students would be admitted at the cost of all other students- white, black, and brown.

So, to be fair, if we are going to discriminate, we're going to have put quotas on all race. Quotas don't just mean at least x amount of people. It also means, at max, x amount of people.

Unless you mean, we'll reserve 25% of the school for black/brown/red people, and Asians and whites can battle it out for the remaining 75%.

I don't think there should be quotas for any race at all. In my opinion, affirmative action should be based on socioeconomic guidelines. The socioeconomically disadvantaged, in which African Americans and Hispanic Americans are disproportionately represented due to historical reasons and sociocultural structural paradigms, will benefit, but so will those from other races as well. If you come from a wealthy background, you don't need affirmative action on your side.

 

[SillyEskimo]

It will be interesting to see which side the law agrees with.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

I wanted to post this because I thought it was interesting and deals with a lot of what's being said here:

Also I didn't know "well rounded" was a loaded term in the Asian American community. The more you know. I now see why Backslashbunny was so ... frustrated.

Anyway a really good read:

http://www.asian-nation.org/affirmative-action.shtml

 

[CapNBritain]

I don't think there should be quotas for any race at all. In my opinion, affirmative action should be based on socioeconomic guidelines. The socioeconomically disadvantaged, in which African Americans and Hispanic Americans are disproportionately represented due to historical reasons and sociocultural structural paradigms, will benefit, but so will those from other races as well. If you come from a wealthy background, you don't need affirmative action on your side.

Yep, I'm glad at least one person agrees with me. I'm open to having my mind changed, but so far nothing makes as much sense to me as the above.

I wanted to post this because I thought it was interesting and deals with a lot of what's being said here:

Also I didn't know "well rounded" was a loaded term in the Asian American community. The more you know. I now see why Backslashbunny was so ... frustrated.

Anyway a really good read:

http://www.asian-nation.org/affirmative-action.shtml

You're killing it with awesome links today man. Thanks!

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

I wanted to post this because I thought it was interesting and deals with a lot of what's being said here:

Also I didn't know "well rounded" was a loaded term in the Asian American community. The more you know. I now see why Backslashbunny was so ... frustrated.

Anyway a really good read:

http://www.asian-nation.org/affirmative-action.shtml

Haha, I guess it has become somewhat loaded. After all, the popular assumption is that because Asians strive so hard academically, they must all came from oppressive Tiger Mom families where the expectation is to become a doctor, lawyer or banker or otherwise you're a failure. While there's definitely high expectations in many immigrant families (of all races, may I add), it's frustrating when the assumption is that all Asians are just academic robots with no other interests besides studying.

Funnily enough, I do want to be a doctor. But I actually majored in political science and decided I wanted to go into medicine after finishing university. Needless to say, my parents where rather unhappy with this decision, due to the potential negative financial ramifications.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

This actually makes me wonder; is there anything like affirmative action in developed countries that weren't nurtured by racism and genocide?

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

This actually makes me wonder; is there anything like affirmative action in developed countries that weren't nurtured by racism and genocide?

I think it's hard to compare to other countries when school systems, both K12 and at the university level, and both public and private, vastly differ from country to country

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhori...closer look at asian americans and education/


https://www.insidehighered.com/news...crimination-against-asian-american-applicants


I'm surprised that you've never heard of "well-rounded" being used against Asians in schools. It's a pretty common stereotype of Asians- we're quiet, meek students that do nothing but memorize and study. We're not "creative." We're not "leaders." All we care about is getting good grade in schools.

It's used against us all the time.

I didn't. Which is odd considering all my exes are asian (who were all incredibly creative) I live in a town that has a huge asian population (I can and do practice Mandarin with ease) and am a member of a community outreach center that's 90% asian. In terms of not being creative and not being leaders none of my asian friends are like that although most if not all of my friends are creatives. These are all anecdotal myopic viewpoints though. Of course I have heard frustration with people viewing asians as only caring about grades but I've never heard "well-rounded" as means of discriminating against asians.

edit: for reference asians double the black populace in my city.

 

[Cybit]

Haha, I guess it has become somewhat loaded. After all, the popular assumption is that because Asians strive so hard academically, they must all came from oppressive Tiger Mom families where the expectation is to become a doctor, lawyer or banker or otherwise you're a failure. While there's definitely high expectations in many immigrant families (of all races, may I add), it's frustrating when the assumption is that all Asians are just academic robots with no other interests besides studying.

Funnily enough, I do want to be a doctor. But I actually majored in political science and decided I wanted to go into medicine after finishing university. Needless to say, my parents where rather unhappy with this decision, due to the potential negative financial ramifications.

LOL, they do always complain if we don't go into medicine. I got my degree in freaking rocket science and they were like "well you can get your aerospace degree and then go to medical school afterward". In true stereotype fashion, of course I'm first generation Indian. I remember going to the indian student association meeting my freshman year, and out of like 70 or so kids (roughly 5600 students total); I was the only one not going into medicine or business.

<dead>

I actually don't get too terribly upset when people assume I'm a doctor after that.

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

LOL, they do always complain if we don't go into medicine. I went into freaking rocket science and they were like "well you can get your aerospace degree and then go to medical school afterward". In true stereotype fashion, of course I'm first generation Indian. I remember going to the indian student association meeting my freshman year, and out of like 70 or so kids (roughly 5600 students total); I was the only one not going into medicine or business.

<dead>

I actually don't get too terribly upset when people assume I'm a doctor after that.

Haha it does definitely seem like the case with Indian American families. I'm Chinese American, my parents mostly pressured me to go into finance. See, there's diversity in the Asian American community! ; )

 

[Cybit]

Haha it does definitely seem like the case with Indian American families. I'm Chinese American, my parents mostly pressured me to go into finance. See, there's diversity in the Asian American community! ; )

I don't know, I feel like all of the fields fall into "future dictator of the world" types of jobs. ;-)

Also, there's an Asian GAF? would be kind of cool to actually talk to other asians.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Haha, I guess it has become somewhat loaded. After all, the popular assumption is that because Asians strive so hard academically, they must all came from oppressive Tiger Mom families where the expectation is to become a doctor, lawyer or banker or otherwise you're a failure. While there's definitely high expectations in many immigrant families (of all races, may I add), it's frustrating when the assumption is that all Asians are just academic robots with no other interests besides studying.

Funnily enough, I do want to be a doctor. But I actually majored in political science and decided I wanted to go into medicine after finishing university. Needless to say, my parents where rather unhappy with this decision, due to the potential negative financial ramifications.

This is totally true. Anecdotally I have also noticed this same mentality towards Africans (not African Americans)

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

I didn't. Which is odd considering all my exes are asian (who were all incredibly creative) I live in a town that has a huge asian population (I can and do practice Mandarin with ease) and am a member of a community outreach center that's 90% asian. In terms of not being creative and not being leaders none of my asian friends are like that although most if not all of my friends are creatives. These are all anecdotal myopic viewpoints though. Of course I have heard frustration with people viewing asians as only caring about grades but I've never heard "well-rounded" as means of discriminating against asians.

Ivy League schools routinely cite that as a reason for why their Asian American demographics are artificially deflated. Hey Harvard, why hasn't the amount of your Asian students increased since 1990, despite the Asian population doubling in that time? Well, you see, our applications are holistic and we look for more well rounded applicants. Guess white nerds are just more well rounded than Asian ones.

 

[kirblar]

I'm about to start binge-ing DS9; is there an episode I'm going to see and just facepalm the entire way through with respect to this discussion?

Nah, it's not a facepalm, just a metaphor you're unlikely to grasp as a kid.

 

[Tempesta di Fuoco]

Poor white people and their unfair life

Dat not-so-subtle racism.

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

I don't know, I feel like all of the fields fall into "future dictator of the world" types of jobs. ;-)

Also, there's an Asian GAF? would be kind of cool to actually talk to other asians.

There totally should be an Asian GAF. I motion in favor of one : )

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

Every time a thread comes up about Asians, everyone asks if there's an Asian GAF.

I don't want to be the one to start it.. personal reasons.. but someone should.

Asian GAF OT: We're all the same, like Stormtroopers.

I got the pressure for pharmacy school since "med school is too competitive and hard," but I ended up majoring in English. Parents gave up at that point and let me do my own thing, only nagging me about God and marriage and moving home.

No way I would have survived the competitive landscape that is the medical field.

Haha I'd totally make it but I'm a junior, so I can't, I think? I've actually been lurking for almost a decade, as GAF has become my go-to source for gaming news. I guess I finally found a topic in which I was passionate enough to contribute to. There's just so much misunderstanding about the topic, and the role of Asian Americans in it.

I think in general we can say that Asian Americans SUPPORT affirmative action, just not the way it's been implemented so far.

 

[Measley]

An excellent video to watch for anyone who wants a good perspective on why AA is still needed

Gotdamn!

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Race is applied functionally as a modifier to SAT scores / GPA when being used for admissions determination. That's all I said. That's what the Fox News <jumps into shower, gets out> cited report says. That's what the MCAT graphic up there says. Holistic admissions takes other things into account, as stated (and nowhere disputed by anyone), but, in terms of test scores, race is a modifying factor to test scores & GPA; and has a very high place as a tiebreaker.

Alumni actually generally doesn't matter too much for most schools; usually what happens is that if someone is the kid of an alumni, in most cases, they basically end up living to their parents expectations, which are usually similar to the ones they had themselves, so they end up getting similar grades / test scores. (The really elite schools might have something different, I can only speak to public universities)

Reading this I'm curious what state was the school in that you were an admissions officer and if you care what school? And how much is race a factor when weighted against test scores?

edit:

Haha I'd totally make it but I'm a junior, so I can't, I think? I've actually been lurking for almost a decade, as GAF has become my go-to source for gaming news. I guess I finally found a topic in which I was passionate enough to contribute to. There's just so much misunderstanding about the topic, and the role of Asian Americans in it.

I think in general we can say that Asian Americans SUPPORT affirmative action, just not the way it's been implemented so far.

From what I've been reading, AA negatively affects some asians, while hugely benefitting others. I know it's quite broad and I don't know if you can answer this but my question is how would you implement AA? What is your ideal implementation?

 

[Cybit]

Every time a thread comes up about Asians, everyone asks if there's an Asian GAF.

I don't want to be the one to start it.. personal reasons.. but someone should.

Asian GAF OT: We're all the same, like Stormtroopers.

I got the pressure for pharmacy school since "med school is too competitive and hard," but I ended up majoring in English. Parents gave up at that point and let me do my own thing, only nagging me about God and marriage and moving home.

No way I would have survived the competitive landscape that is the medical field.

I am totally stealing that OT topic title; I'll create it when I get home from work. I am bowing to you over the internet for that line. That line is so, so freaking epic.

Glad your parents stopped giving you grief (for the most part). I feel the pain on marriage and moving home; been on me for 7 years now about it. :/

 

[Cybit]

Reading this I'm curious what state was the school in that you were an admissions officer and if you care what school? And how much is race a factor when weighted against test scores?

I wasn't an admissions officer; I was asked by a friend to look at their admission / applicant data to do some analysis, and because I'm nosy (and the data begged some questions); I got a crash course in how a lot of this stuff works. Alas, I can't state which university this was with.

Test Scores / GPA were the biggest factors, but the interesting thing was the interplay and the subtlety. For instance, depending on the location and the race, they would give more weight to GPA / or test scores, and also increase or decrease the modification due to race, based on their knowledge of the education (high schools, etc) and socio-economics of that area. So they know some schools are inflaters, others deflate, some races would get a bigger bump to their effective test scores, etc.

They (at least now) try to use their past data to create baselines and come up with some basic mathematics behind what the bumps should be. But..it's hard, because it's hard to find post-graduation data, and even blending the admittance data with the in-school achievement (GPA in classes, etc) data was something they hadn't done when I was asked. (This is why I was asked, my friend knows I'm a math nerd / data nerd, so she wanted help figuring out how much to weigh stuff, etc etc, and whether there was a better way to approach it)

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

edit:
From what I've been reading, AA negatively affects some asians, while hugely benefitting others. I know it's quite broad and I don't know if you can answer this but my question is how would you implement AA? What is your ideal implementation?

That's the difficult question, isn't it? Like Cybit posted earlier, even the schools that have implemented some form of affirmative action go about it in different ways.

Personally, I don't think there should be affirmative action based on race. There should be affirmative action based on socioeconomic circumstances. The economically disadvantaged should get a leg up in the admissions process over the economically privileged. African American and Hispanic Americans are disproportionately represented in the disadvantaged classes, so they will benefit, along with those from all other backgrounds.

Of course, I see the problems with this as well, as it skirts behind the obvious systemic discrimination that many groups do face based on race, not socioeconomic class. And of course, something like this might be interpreted as akin to a "class war" or "wealth redistribution", things much scarier to the average American than issues of race.

At the very least, admittedly in my own self interest, Asian Americans shouldn't have to face steeper admission standards than white students. In no way, shape or form are Asians in this country more privileged than whites. So affirmative action shouldn't result in more stringent standards for admission compared to whites. Parity, perhaps (although I'd disagree), but not more difficult.

 

[firehawk12]

It always feels weird that Asians are against affirmative action.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

That's the difficult question, isn't it? Like Cybit posted earlier, even the schools that have implemented some form of affirmative action go about it in different ways.

Personally, I don't think there should be affirmative action based on race. There should be affirmative action based on socioeconomic circumstances. The economically disadvantaged should get a leg up in the admissions process over the economically privileged. African American and Hispanic Americans are disproportionately represented in the disadvantaged classes, so they will benefit, along with those from all other backgrounds.

And it's been repeatedly proven how this just doesn't make sense. Yes, it will help other groups in lower socioeconomic groups but it won't help african americans or hispanics. Not to mention there is no such thing as affirmative action purely based on race. You keep acting like socioeconomic concerns and race are mutually exclusive and handle completely separately, but they're entangled and affect one another. As Cybit shows, places that implore AA take into consideration race AND socioeconomic status and conditions

At the very least, admittedly in my own self interest, Asian Americans shouldn't have to face steeper admission standards than white students. In no way, shape or form are Asians in this country more privileged than whites. So affirmative action shouldn't result in more stringent standards for admission compared to whites. Parity, perhaps (although I'd disagree), but not more difficult.

This is the crux of the issue

 

[Hyperactivity]

I went to UCRejects for college.

Spoiler

My SAT score was 2100, my GPA was 3.5 (this is probably what killed me in admissions though), and I was National Merit, in MUN, speech & debate, orchestra, band, honor society. No sports for me.

All my nonAsian friends at UCR were like WTF are you doing here.. and all my Asian friends (there) were like me. We either missed a high GPA or a high SAT score. People say you can "make up" for one or the other (purely in an academic sense)... yeah, no. Not for Asians.



The "problem" here is that, if you go by "merit" and not skin color, the percentage should be much, much higher. It's not.

Of course, I would argue that the fact that Harvard's ethnic makeup doesn't reflect US's ethnic makeup is the real problem here.

Goddammit I'm already fucked
Fuck 9th grade

Asian-GAF here

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

That's the difficult question, isn't it? Like Cybit posted earlier, even the schools that have implemented some form of affirmative action go about it in different ways.

Personally, I don't think there should be affirmative action based on race. There should be affirmative action based on socioeconomic circumstances. The economically disadvantaged should get a leg up in the admissions process over the economically privileged. African American and Hispanic Americans are disproportionately represented in the disadvantaged classes, so they will benefit, along with those from all other backgrounds.

Of course, I see the problems with this as well, as it skirts behind the obvious systemic discrimination that many groups do face based on race, not socioeconomic class. And of course, something like this might be interpreted as akin to a "class war" or "wealth redistribution", things much scarier to the average American than issues of race.

At the very least, admittedly in my own self interest, Asian Americans shouldn't have to face steeper admission standards than white students. In no way, shape or form are Asians in this country more privileged than whites. So affirmative action shouldn't result in more stringent standards for admission compared to whites. Parity, perhaps (although I'd disagree), but not more difficult.

I certainly agree to an extent but as you said going with socio economic circumstances will negatively impact blacks and hispanics. Most of the racism that I've personally encountered has never been because of how much or how little money I make or where I live but simply because I'm black. I'd argue that it's incredibly hard if impossible to divorce the two. I don't think the answer has anything to do with changing the way AA works today but adding an addendum to address the unfair practice of more stringent admission standards for a certain group of Asians .

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

And it's been repeatedly proven how this just doesn't make sense. Yes, it will help other groups in lower socioeconomic groups but it won't help african americans or hispanics. Not to mention there is no such thing as affirmative action purely based on race. You keep acting like socioeconomic concerns and race are mutually exclusive and handle completely separately, but they're entangled and affect one another. As Cybit shows, places that implore AA take into consideration race AND socioeconomic status and conditions

How has it been repeatedly shown that affirmative action based on socioeconomic class alone won't help African Americans or Hispanics? Please explain and/or provide a link.

This is the crux of the issue.

And what are you implying with this? Of course there is self interest. I believe that I am being discriminated on the basis of my race. Of course I'm going to stand up for myself and be vocal about the issue. Look at all the data provided in this thread and tell me with a straight face that Asian Americans aren't being discriminated against by affirmative action.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

How has it been repeatedly shown that affirmative action based on socioeconomic class alone won't help African Americans or Hispanics? Please explain and/or provide a link.

The link posted by Foxy, and also in my OP. There are a number of other factors and infleunces aside from "Poorer students need more help"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uH0vpGZJCo

And what are you implying with this? Of course there is self interest. I believe that I am being discriminated on the basis of my race. Of course I'm going to stand up for myself and be vocal about the issue. Look at all the data provided in this thread and tell me with a straight face that Asian Americans aren't being discriminated against by affirmative action.

I'm not implying anything. I'm saying the crux of the issue with AA isn't that it should be socioeconomic-based, it's that it negatively affects Asians, as you stated. THAT aspect should be addressed, but removing it and making aid only socioeconomic based will make things significantly worse for blacks and hispanics. There is a racism issue that is both entangled with class and separate from it, at the same time, which is why for most AA initiatives race is only a factor, not the entire basis

 

[HisImperialMajesty]

I certainly agree to an extent but as you said going with socio economic circumstances will negatively impact blacks and hispanics. Most of the racism that I've personally encountered has never been because of how much or how little money I make or where I live but simply because I'm black. I'd argue that it's incredibly hard if impossible to divorce the two. I don't think the answer has anything to do with changing the way AA works today but adding an addendum to address the unfair practice of more stringent admission standards for a certain group of Asians .

I'd be in support of this as well. I'm not trying to ignore the fact that African Americans and Hispanic Americans face incontrovertible systemic discrimination in this country, that makes their lives much more difficult compared to other groups, including Asian Americans. In fact, what we should be doing is finding a way to enact the right policies and provide the right funding to provide access of quality education to these communities, beginning at the pre-K level. Obama has been doing some good things on that front, but it's going to have to continue and grow at a much larger scale.

In the end, however, affirmative action is only a bandaid for the much grander systemic and structural issues at play. And lost amidst all this, we can't simply ignore the fact that there is a large population of Asian American students that are unfairly targeted with more difficult admissions standards in the name of affirmative action. So yes, as I've stated before, I support the idea of affirmative action but there needs to be changes in its implementation.

 

[CapNBritain]

And it's been repeatedly proven how this just doesn't make sense. Yes, it will help other groups in lower socioeconomic groups but it won't help african americans or hispanics. Not to mention there is no such thing as affirmative action purely based on race. You keep acting like socioeconomic concerns and race are mutually exclusive and handle completely separately, but they're entangled and affect one another. As Cybit shows, places that implore AA take into consideration race AND socioeconomic status and conditions



This is the crux of the issue

I don't see how it wouldn't help african americans and hispanics. In fact, it will directly help african americans and hispanics that need help financially. Will it help as much as Aa will/does? Probably not, but hey, you get the added bonus of only helping people that need and and not screwing over others (like Asians). How is this a bad thing?

If primary socioeconomical-based affirmative action was a thing, it seems like it'd help Hispanics, American-natives, and blacks, the most.

When it comes to SAT scores, for example, it correlates the strongest with household income, not skin color. SAT scores are not the end-all to college admissions, but that should tell you that academic success correlates the strongest with family income... which would make sense to help the financially poorest students, who need the most help to compete on an equal playing field.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ow-the-sat-favors-the-rich-educated-families/

Also,

Also another link:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014...me-inequality-how-wealthier-kids-rank-higher/


*edit: What I'm saying is, honestly, weighing socio-economical background as the primary factor, AA should not change how AA is currently benefiting certain minorities, if you look at the data of poverty by race, household income by race, etc.

It will, however, level the playing field between whites and Asians.

Also, this. I see that backslashbunny is still in favor of AA, and in a world where it could be implemented fairly, sure, why not. But I think it is naive to believe that it can be.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

If primary socioeconomical-based affirmative action was a thing, it seems like it'd help Hispanics, American-natives, and blacks, the most.

When it comes to SAT scores, for example, it correlates the strongest with household income, not skin color. SAT scores are not the end-all to college admissions, but that should tell you that academic success correlates the strongest with family income... which would make sense to help the financially poorest students, who need the most help to compete on an equal playing field.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ow-the-sat-favors-the-rich-educated-families/

Also,

Also another link:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014...me-inequality-how-wealthier-kids-rank-higher/


*edit: What I'm saying is, honestly, weighing socio-economical background as the primary factor, AA should not change how AA is currently benefiting certain minorities, if you look at the data of poverty by race, household income by race, etc.

It will, however, level the playing field between whites and Asians.

I don't think you realize that socio-economic conditions were the result of race based discrimination. Black people aren't poor because they're poor and lazy. Black people are doing so terribly compared to other races because state sponsored discrimination crippled us and its still very much alive today. The problem is race. The consequence is minorities being shafted economically. I have no problem taking into account socio-economic circumstances but to weigh that as the primary factor ignores how we got here and doesn't necessarily solve the problem of conscious and subconscious bias that whites and many Americans tend to have against blacks and other minorities.

 

[Valhelm]

If primary socioeconomical-based affirmative action was a thing, it seems like it'd help Hispanics, American-natives, and blacks, the most.

When it comes to SAT scores, for example, it correlates the strongest with household income, not skin color. SAT scores are not the end-all to college admissions, but that should tell you that academic success correlates the strongest with family income... which would make sense to help the financially poorest students, who need the most help to compete on an equal playing field.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ow-the-sat-favors-the-rich-educated-families/

Also,

Also another link:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014...me-inequality-how-wealthier-kids-rank-higher/


*edit: What I'm saying is, honestly, weighing socio-economical background as the primary factor, AA should not change how AA is currently benefiting certain minorities, if you look at the data of poverty by race, household income by race, etc.

It will, however, level the playing field between whites and Asians.
*second edit: & by that I mean some of the bias in targeting Asians because they are Asian, will be removed. Given that many Asian households also have high incomes, it's not going to help them at all, but I would argue they don't need help. Also, some of the poorer Asian minorities that often get double-shafted by standards against Asians without any benefits of high income, high education level parents, will also get a boost.

Thanks so much for all these stats.