AA revisited

[Chidoro]

The supreme court made it's decision w/ regards to the university of michigan: http://www.msnbc.com/news/929326.asp

MSNBC STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS

WASHINGTON, June 23 — A divided U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld a University of Michigan law school admissions policy that gives minorities an edge, but the justices overturned a second policy that relied on a point system to determine which undergraduates are admitted.






• Get Life Insurance
• eDiets Diet Center
• Yellow Pages
• Get A Loan
• expedia.com
• Shopping


















Do you agree with the Supreme Court's rulings on affirmative action?
* 14215 responses
Yes. The court found reasonable middle ground.
18%
No. The court should have gone further to protect minorities.
14%
No. The time has come to eliminate such policies.
68%

Survey results tallied every 60 seconds. Live Votes reflect respondents' views and are not scientifically valid surveys.


THE DECISIONS maintained a distinction that the high court made in the 1978 Bakke decision, striking down a point system used by the university to determine undergraduate admissions, ruling that the system is tantamount to a quota.
But the split decision did not go as far as opponents of affirmative action had wanted, as the court endorsed a separate program used by the university’s law school that gives race less prominence in the admissions decision-making process, while seeking to attain a “critical mass” of minority students.
The court divided in both cases. It upheld the law school program by a 5-4 vote, with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor siding with the court’s more liberal justices to decide the case.
The court split 6-3 in finding the undergraduate program unconstitutional. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion in the undergraduate case, joined by O’Connor and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer.
Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented.
The cases are the most significant test of affirmative action to reach the court in a generation. At issue was whether racial preference programs unconstitutionally discriminate against white students.
The majority opinion in the law-school case said the policy preserves the concept of affirmative action for minorities who might otherwise be underrepresented on top campuses.

USE MUST BE ‘NARROWLY TAILORED’
“The (Constitution’s) Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the law school’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body,” O’Connor wrote.
In the case involving the university’s undergraduate admissions, the high court said the point system used by the school was a thinly disguised quota.


Court news


• Split decision on affirmative action
• Internet filters for libraries upheld
• Curry: O'Connor's immense power
• Newsweek: 25 years after Bakke






While it set no fixed target for the number of minority students who should get in, the point-based evaluation system gave minority applicants a 20-point boost.
“The university’s policy, which automatically distributes 20 points, or one-fifth of the points needed to guarantee admission, to every single underrepresented minority applicant solely because of race, is not narrowly tailored to achieve the interest in educational diversity,” that Michigan claimed justified the policy, said Rehnquist, writing for the majority.
Government has a compelling interest in promoting racial diversity on campus, but the undergraduate school’s admissions policy is not the way to get there, he wrote.
The university’s president, Mary Sue Coleman, hailed the decisions, saying the court had established a “road map” for schools to follow in crafting affirmative action programs.
“The doors are open,” she told NBC News. “People can come to the university of all races and backgrounds.”
But Terry Pell, president of the Center for Individual Rights, the public interest law firm representing the white plaintiffs, said that many schools will likely abandon racial preferences rather than run the risk of legal challenges.



June 23 — University of Michigan students are divided in their reactions to the top court’s ruling.



“It’s true that a school can avail itself of the law school rationale, but it is going to find itself in court pretty quickly, and that’s expensive and risky,” he said. “I think most schools are going to what hundreds of schools have done - achieve diversity without race preferences.”
Pell said the court also emphasized that “there’s got to be a time limit to this — whether or not there are race-neutral alternatives.”
The law school ruling follows the path the court set a generation ago, when it outlawed quotas but still left room for schools to improve the odds for minority applicants.
The decisions will affect admissions practices at public colleges nationwide, as well as scholarship, tutoring, internships and fellowship programs reserved for blacks, Latinos and Native Americans.

IMPACT WILL BE FAR-REACHING
But the court’s rationale is expected to send a wide ripple through private colleges and universities, other government decision-making and the business world.
“This court has long recognized that ‘education is the very foundation of good citizenship,’” O’Connor wrote, quoting from the landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling of nearly 50 years ago.
Advertisement





“For this reason, the diffusion of knowledge and opportunity through public institutions of higher education must be accessible to all individuals regardless of race or ethnicity,” O’Connor wrote. “Effective participation by members of all racial and ethnic groups in the civic life of our nation is essential if the dream of one nation, indivisible, is to be realized.”
Opponents of affirmative action had hoped the Supreme Court would use this opportunity to ban most consideration of race in any government decisions. The court is far more conservative than in 1978, when it last ruled on affirmative action in higher education admissions, and the justices have put heavy conditions on government affirmative action in other arenas over the past decade.
The rulings came in two cases in which white applicants rejected by the University of Michigan and its law school challenged the school’s admissions policies as unconstitutional racial discrimination.
The students contended that black, Latino and American Indian candidates with the same qualifications were given preferential treatment.

A 20-POINT BONUS
The Michigan undergraduate school gave minority applicants a 20-point bonus out of a possible 150 points, while various measures of academic performance, extracurricular activity and other attributes were generally worth fewer points.
The school has also “flagged” minority applications, making it easier to keep an applicant in the pool even if he or she flunked an initial review.





• A question of fairness




The law school used a vaguer system intended to yield a “critical mass” of minorities in each class, generally around 10 percent or more.
At stake was the meaning of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause which says no state shall “deny to any person... the equal protection of the laws.”
In the 1978 Bakke decision, the court had held that it was not a violation of the Equal Protection Clause for a state university to use an applicant’s race as one factor among several factors in determining whether to admit him.
In the Bakke case, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote in his concurring opinion that, “In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way. And in order to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently.”
The legal test established by previous Supreme Court decisions is whether Michigan had a “compelling governmental interest” that justified using racial and ethnic preferences.
The justices ruled that the university did have such a compelling interest.

MANY WEIGH IN
The Court received nearly 100 friend-of-the-court briefs in the Michigan cases.
Seventy-eight briefs supported the university, arguing that affirmative action based on racial preferences has a place in American life, from the classroom to the boardroom. Those briefs were filed by various groups that range from the American Bar Association representing lawyers to a group of retired military officers and a number of large corporations.
Nineteen briefs backed the white students, including those filed by conservative groups, the Bush administration, and the state of Florida and its governor, Jeb Bush, the president’s brother.



The time issue was one of the questions the court was implicitly addressing in the case. Had the time passed for preferences, or were they still needed to overcome the effects of discrimination against blacks, Latinos, and American Indians?
According to the account in John Jeffries’ biography of Justice Lewis Powell, who wrote the Bakke decision, when the justices were debating the Bakke case in their closed-door conference in 1978, Justice John Paul Stevens said preferences would be acceptable only as a temporary measure, not as a permanent solution. Powell agreed.
Stevens suggested that blacks would not need preferences much longer. But Justice Thurgood Marshall, the first black justice in the court’s history, disagreed, saying preferences would be needed for another hundred years. “This remark left Powell speechless,” according to Jeffries. He “recoiled from the prospect of generation upon generation of racial quotas.”

The undergraduate policy gets shot down while the law school is upheld. I find it interesting that the poll is heavily in favor of removing any type of AA program not that internet polls are really representative of the population as a whole though.

[Zamtuk]

UofM's law school is upwards of $50k a year. So, with that kind of tuition in place, I wouldn't think race would be an issue.

[kyoukan]

Most people want to get rid of affirmative action. I would love to do away with affirmative action entirely. The problem is they don't know what to replace it with. And you are huffing gas of you think that there will be equal representation of women and minorities on a broad scale without affirmative action.

Affirmative action was supposed to be a temporary solution to the unfair advantage white males get in the work force and post-secondary educational system (omg here comes my racism again, snore). It was only supposed to around until people were more accustomed to seeing women and minorities around them in university and in management positions. The only problem is that after 20 years most universities and corporations hire exactly the amount of women and minorities they're "supposed to" just to keep their quotas up, and then go back to their old exclusionary hiring practices.

[Sylvus]

As a UofM alum, I'm glad they are changing Michigan's undergrad admissions policy. Affirmative Action always rubbed me the wrong way, as their policies almost denied me entry into the only University that I had ever wanted to go to. I by no means want to imply that the world is right and that racism and prejudice no longer exist, but AA is a flawed system.

I saw an African American girl that I went to school with who was a lesser candidate for admission across the board get in, and the University send me a letter telling me that all spots were taken and I was being put on the wait list. The problem lies in that she and I went to the same private school. She was from an affluent family, she and I were in the same classes, she had worse grades and way lower test scores than me. She had no extracurricular activities; I was captain of the football team and played basketball and ran track. The only reason she got in during the first round of admissions is that she checked the African American box and I checked the Caucasian box.

The whole problem that I have with AA is that it is assuming disadvantage solely based on where your ancestors came from. Had it been someone with lower qualifications than me who got in, and they were from a school with less funding and teachers that weren't as good, I would not be writing this message right now. It is way more difficult to get into college when you come from a poorer area and don't have quality teachers and facilities or you are the first in your family who is trying to attend college or a number of other reasons that are not in any way addressed by Affirmative Action.

It would be much better if they could just leave any mention of race, sex or religion off of those forms and compare the student to other students in their area. Maybe take into account class size, teacher/student ratio, school budget, whether other members of their family had been to college... things like that. In one school, the average SAT score might be 1400 and they get an application from someone there who got a 1300 and another school has an average of 800 and they get one where someone got a 1250. In that case, it may be a good call to pick the person with the lower scores, and who cares if they are black, white, purple, gay, jewish, or hermaphroditic. Give the advantage to people who need an advantage, and don't just assume someone needs and advantage because other people that look similar to them have been hurt in some way in the past.

[Ashur]

The only problem is that after 20 years most universities and corporations hire exactly the amount of women and minorities they're "supposed to" just to keep their quotas up, and then go back to their old exclusionary hiring practices.

Interesting observation. Why do you suppose that is?

[Chidoro]

I don't think we're in the dark ages on this anymore and would hesitate to agree that once the "quota" is filled, it's back to the good ole' boys mentality. That's not to say some industries still do that but it's more the exception and not the rule (oil companies come to mind). I would go futher to say that white women don't have the same level of difficulties that minorities of any gender have right now. Women have upper level management difficulties but in my experience that barrier comes down at middle management levels and below.


Edit: Syl, that's exactly my view on it. Race seems to be the easy way out of a difficult process identifying desire and untapped talent. Disadvantaged students != minority. On the other hand, having a student body that's repesentative of the country's population allows students to learn more indirectly.

[Homercles]

The only problem is that after 20 years most universities and corporations hire exactly the amount of women and minorities they're "supposed to" just to keep their quotas up, and then go back to their old exclusionary hiring practices.

20 years is a fairly shot period of time. Say white men held all the coveted university and corporate position prior to the advent of AA. Theyve been holding those positions, training and educating for those positions since the founding of the country and beyond. To say corporations and universities are discriminating because they only fill out the quota isnt fair to say. Youre trying to incorporate women and minorities throughout hundreds of thousands of colleges, universities, hospitals, corporations, law firms, etc. The pickings are still thin after only 20 years. The education process doesnt happen over night. It takes 27 years just to earn a law degree. It takes time to level out the workplace. It will takes decades and decades. Generation after generation.

To force people to hire a certain percentage of minorities is not the way to level the field. That breeds resentment and hostilities. Which will lead to discrimination. Hiring should be based solely on merit, credentials, and accomplishments. Right now, women with the credentials are snatched up as fast as you can say shaved snizz. Same goes for qualified minorities. They are in such high demand its not even funny. There just arent enough to go around yet.

[Fairweather Pure]

U of M was also close to getting their state funding widrawn because they were getting pretty low in terms of students that are actually from Michigan.

[kyoukan]

Well Sylvus' method of picking students is as good as any I've ever heard but it still puts a lot more work on the people who are handling admissions and doesn't do much at all to change things in the work place.

I saw an African American girl that I went to school with who was a lesser candidate for admission across the board get in, and the University send me a letter telling me that all spots were taken and I was being put on the wait list.

Yes well its nearly impossible to look at things at a case by case basis, so the university admissions just uses averages. The average african american female is coming from a position of disadvantage when she applies to a college. You are doing what everyone else who opposes affirmative action does in that you are using anecdotal evidence to prove your point over statistical evidence. I've probably heard enough affirmative action sob stories where some poor white dude got screwed out of his destiny of being a millionaire lawyer by the time he was 35 because of some lazy darkie that took his place in university because of AA that I could write a book on the topic.

[Homercles]

If Sylvus was more qualified than this other girl, then he shouldve been accepted over her. Thats a hands down no brainer. And thats why Affirmative Action is wrong. Qualifications should be the deciding factors on admittance and hirings. Basing it on skin color is demeaning.

Michigan Admin talks to black girl that got accepted over Sylvus, "Yes, your scores were lower than other applicants. But you see, youre black. You dont need to match that white boys scores. Youre black. We'll let you in because of that. You dont need to be the best, you just need to be good enough."

[Ashur]

Right now, women with the credentials are snatched up as fast as you can say shaved snizz. Same goes for qualified minorities. They are in such high demand its not even funny. There just arent enough to go around yet.

Which is exactly my experience after being involved in the workplace with HR and being more than once in a hiring role, which is why I was wanting to hear more about these exclusionary practices where minorities and women are not valued that Kyoukan is so familiar with.

[kyoukan]

If Sylvus was more qualified than this other girl, then he shouldve been accepted over her. Thats a hands down no brainer. And thats why Affirmative Action is wrong. Qualifications should be the deciding factors on admittance and hirings. Basing it on skin color is demeaning.

Michigan Admin talks to black girl that got accepted over Sylvus, "Yes, your scores were lower than other applicants. But you see, youre black. You dont need to match that white boys scores. Youre black. We'll let you in because of that. You dont need to be the best, you just need to be good enough."

So you think the onus is on the school admissions to look in to every specific case to make sure she is disadvantaged or not instead of just the average?

[Sylvus]

Yes well its nearly impossible to look at things at a case by case basis, so the university admissions just uses averages. The average african american female is coming from a position of disadvantage when she applies to a college. You are doing what everyone else who opposes affirmative action does in that you are using anecdotal evidence to prove your point over statistical evidence. I've probably heard enough affirmative action sob stories where some poor white dude got screwed out of his destiny of being a millionaire lawyer by the time he was 35 because of some lazy darkie that took his place in university because of AA that I could write a book on the topic.

What statistical evidence are you speaking of, exactly? My point is that the system is flawed, are there statistics that would make my anecdote irrelevant? And if you have heard so many anecdotes, at some point don't they create a statistic of their own?

My story was simply to relate why I felt Affirmative Action was flawed. I'm not against helping people out who need help, I just think that reinforcing the idea that people need help simply because they are of a different race or sex does more harm than good.

If we change the way college admissions work, I think the business world will subsequently fall in line. Forcing colleges to take minorities breeds mistrust on the part of potential employers as to whether or not the person got into college because they were qualified or if it was to fill a quota. Say the business has already filled their quota and they have one spot left and it's two evenly-matched candidates, a black one and a white one. They might be more apt to hire the white candidate because they know that he didn't get where he is because of any government enforced special treatment. Another possible factor in perpetuating the exclusionary hiring practices you touched on in your first post.

Change it so that everyone who goes to your college is there based on merit, and that will quell the fears of the businesses. Again, I only have narrow experience of my own, and this too is anecdotal, but I believe that most businesses in the United States are, bottom line, looking to turn a profit. Present the best candidate, one that a business can be assured is the best, and nine times out of ten they'll get the job. The tenth time they might not because the person doing the hiring is some sort of a bigot, and their company won't do as well because their people aren't as good and hopefully the company will suffer from economic Darwinism.

Do you think that if Affirmative Action was abolished tomorrow, that in 5 years we'd see all businesses and colleges filled only with white men? I believe the momentum is too great for us to end up back where we were 25 years ago and that Affirmative Action hurts us more than it helps us.

[kyoukan]

so what is your alternative to affirmative action? just abolish it completely, replace it with nothing, and rely on the goodwill of humanity to ensure equal representation in universities and the workplace?

[noel]

In my mind, AA is a stopgap that should only be viewed as a temporary solution to undo years of racial and sexual inequality in both the workplace and educational institutions. If we put the sexual inequality issue to the side for a moment, and focus simply on racial issue, I believe there are better solutions to the problem.

It's my feeling that the true way to correct this inequality is to insure that any individual will have the same opportunity to become educated as another individual who may grow up in a more affluent or priviledged area. Unfortunately, this is not the case, to an individual of any race growing up in a poor community will not recieve the same opportunity to learn as an individual in a wealthy community. This is the problem that needs to be corrected. The chief problem with this is that to see results, you'd have to standardize the sub-higher education system across the board, while ensuring that you maintain the higher level of quality found in the affluent communities, and after that occurred, you'd still need to wait ~16 years to see the results. Once you were sure that everyone was starting out on equal footing, you could do away with AA.

As far as sexual discrimination goes, I'm not sure AA is truly necessary any longer for women, women have truly come a long way, and I don't think they're still being treated like second-class citizens in the workplace any longer. Then again, I'm not a woman, so what do I know.

[Mplor]

Here's a statistic: The gender ratio at my company is approximately 60% women to 40% men. When the Executive Board meets, there are nine men and one woman sitting around the table.

No editorial, just a statistic.

[Kguku]

Place I work at

Management:
3 Men
5 Women

Supervisors:
0 Men
10 Women


Executive board is roughly a 60/40 split in favour of men.

Multiple centres across Canada, rest of the centres average out to a 60/40 split in favour of women in supervisor / upper management roles.

That's just what I've observed in the past 6 years at the place I currently work at.

[Mplor]

OK, here's the editorial:

How Affirmative Action Helped George W.

[Chidoro]

I agree w/ what you're saying Aran. However, more standardized schooling will only go so far as there will always be alternatives to standardized public education. Not only that, but in New Jersey (as I'm sure it is throughout most of the country, but speaking from personal experience) property taxes play a primary role in funding the education system. The differential between towns can be staggering quite frankly. If someone living in a well to do town such as Montclair is paying 15k a year on property taxes (for ~450k home with a 1/4 acre) while someone else living in Tabernacle is paying 6k a year for a 450k home w/ a full acre, the person in Montclair wants more for their dollars spent. After all, they're contributing more to the education system. Why should someone be bused from Tabernacle to Montclair schools if they're not contributing enough to support the Montclair school district?

It's a mess.

As far as hiring the best person or most qualified college applicant goes, that's not always quantifiable. It's easy to say that their GPA was higher or that their SAT's were better, but from a business perspective, that doesn't always represent the best candidate or the candidate that can make the most impact. How can a business that hires nothing but majorities understand what it takes to sell their product or services to a populace that contains minorities? How can a hospital understand a patient's problem if they can't communicate with a 1st or 2nd generation immigrant that's still trying to learn the language (and noone give me the learn english or get out bullshit either as it's beyond hypocritical~)? you need people who can fill these types of roles. So saying, "I had better scores, I should get the job" isn't necessarily true for the business. And that doesn't even begin to cover representing desire and potential.

[Cartalas]

Place I work at

Management:
3 Men
5 Women

Supervisors:
0 Men
10 Women


Executive board is roughly a 60/40 split in favour of men.

Multiple centres across Canada, rest of the centres average out to a 60/40 split in favour of women in supervisor / upper management roles.

That's just what I've observed in the past 6 years at the place I currently work at.

Just curious is the company you work for owned by a women?

[Krimson Klaw]

Hiring people that are qualified for the job is not exlusionary. If AA goes away, then no more hiring people not qualified just to fill a quota. Minorities do need representation, but no one as of yet has come up with a sensible one to replace AA that I know of.

[Ashur]

I fully agree, Krimson.

I'm against AA in principle, because it is literally a policy that is unfair to the individual. However, society isn't quite up to par with where we need to be on equality in the workplace and I think it may take more than 1-2 generations to be rectified. The problem in workplace hiring lies with qualified individuals, the problem with qualified individuals lies with education.

Education... eh, where to begin.

My father in law was a professor at a major state university (GO BUCKS!) and he was on thier AA committee. He said that AA set a lot of kids up for failure in college because many were ill-prepared/qualified academically but were let in on the basis of "equality", only to fail to make the grade. Thier retention rate of students let in due to AA was attrocious despite efforts at tutoring, etc. The problem of equal opportunity needs addressed at the lowest levels of our educational system.

The problem lies with the way schooling is funded at the K-12 level in most places. Here in Ohio, as many other places, it is through local property taxes. Want new programs or new facilities? Vote for the local school levy? Vote no often enough and you find your kids in shitty schools or even in split sessions. The new communities with all the upper middle class white collar workers (can the race card here BTW - these are not exclusive white communities) have excellent scools with lots of college prep and extracurricular activities because the parents recognize the value of it (and can afford the hit on thier property taxes) to thier children.

AA is yucky medicine, but medicine is needed. I'll be glad when it is no longer needed.

[Wulfran]

It was interesting watching Lou Dobbs talk to a legal analyst on CNN last night about this. The analyst said the implications of the law school ruling are that race is not ruled out of being a qualifying factor but that it has to be reviewed on a case basis. He said that essentially UofM or wherever it was, has to examine all 25000 applicants on a case basis. Can you imagine the bureaucratic nightmare that will create for universities?

If that analyst's interpretation is correct, then I can see the schools dumping any AA programs, just because they will be too expensive/cumbersome to administer.

As for affirmative action with regards to women, I see 2 distinct mindsets in the workplace, and they are age related and generally the age differential is 45-50. Those younger have grown up and developed their careers in an environment that has at least professed sexual equality and thus are indoctrinated into its beliefs. Those older can (but not always) remember the male dominated world and some are loathe to share their kingdom. As time passes, the older generation is passing more into retirement and the younger is gaining more control, and a more qualifed women have made inroads into the "upper realms". Couple the generation effect with penalties for sexual discrimination and, at least in Canada, companies don't dare discriminate against women. I know the system isn't perfect even in this case but the gap is closing... it takes time and education to fight discriminatory mindsets, bet they sexist or racist, but they can be changed.

[Cartalas]

How about this for a solution on school admission.

If you score is high enough on your SAT,ACT or GPA you are guaranted enrollment in said states university no matter of race,religion,sexual preferance or sex.

you also will have the ability to recieve a loan from said state.

[Ashur]

If you score is high enough on your SAT,ACT or GPA you are guaranted enrollment in said states university no matter of race,religion,sexual preferance or sex.

you also will have the ability to recieve a loan from said state.

What a novel idea, Cartalas. Why don't you propose this to your state. Have them call it an "Academic Scholarship". I'm sure they will be frightened of this new concept, but in time will come around.

[Krimson Klaw]

Cartalas you are missing the entire point.

[masteen]

There was a minor shitstorm here in Florida about the high rates of minority students that failed the FCAT test at all grade levels. The seniors who flunked it were held back. The sad part is that these tests are basic skills tests. To pass the high school one, a person need only read at about a 5th grade level. So the kids that flunked could not read, yet all the minority leaders pushed to have them graduate anyway. What good is a diploma if you can't even read it?

Regarding women in the workplace:

I want to tell you something Danny and listen up 'cause I mean this: You're the luckiest man in the world. There is, believe me gentlemen, nothing sexier on earth than a woman you have to salute in the morning. Promote 'em all I say.

[Chidoro]

What point are you trying to make? Are you assuming that the candidates who are applying to college or a job are illiterate?

[Cartalas]

If you score is high enough on your SAT,ACT or GPA you are guaranted enrollment in said states university no matter of race,religion,sexual preferance or sex.

you also will have the ability to recieve a loan from said state.

What a novel idea, Cartalas. Why don't you propose this to your state. Have them call it an "Academic Scholarship". I'm sure they will be frightened of this new concept, but in time will come around.

/wave Mr sarcastic I know what a scholarship is. like I said it was a idea, one that would provide everyone from every walk of life a affordable way of going to school. Im not talking a free ride here im talking a loan.

And yes Krimson I understand that the topic is on AA but one of the problems with AA ( Comming from a white middle class male), is that most people dont understand it. They feel like they are being punished for being white middle class, hence all the hate towards it.

[masteen]

What point are you trying to make? Are you assuming that the candidates who are applying to college or a job are illiterate?

My point is that we're still graduating A LOT of kids who cannot actually read. Until we close the basic academic skills gap I don't think the situation can be fixed at the collegiate level. The minority leaders here seemed more concerned with graduation rates over actually getting the kids an education.

[Chidoro]

I'm still not understanding your thought process, what does a student who scrapes by HS for whatever reason(s) have to do w/ the collegiate and workforce AA programs?

[Ashur]

like I said it was a idea, one that would provide everyone from every walk of life a affordable way of going to school. Im not talking a free ride here im talking a loan.

I work for a bank. Tell me why a high SAT Score is qualification enough for a loan.

Secondly, why does a loan make something affordable? I could go buy a mansion in the Hollywood Hills tomorrow if I had a loan, but I dare say I would find it affordable when the mortage payment was due.

I don't mean to pick on you Cartalas, I just find myself scraching my head saying "what the...?" every time you post.

I believe in this case you are proposing that if you demonstrate you are prepared (through high standardized test scores), you should have a state government guaranteed spot in a state university (of your choosing?) and furthermore, the state government should guarantee your student loans and that no other factor then your score on standardized tests should be a factor.

I don't think our state budgets could absorb the losses and it would be an administrative nightmare considering supply/demand and available spots in any given college's student body.

On the other hand, I admire the balls it would take to guarantee that any student who is willing and able can attend college. I just don't see it as realistic.

[Cartalas]

like I said it was a idea, one that would provide everyone from every walk of life a affordable way of going to school. Im not talking a free ride here im talking a loan.

I work for a bank. Tell me why a high SAT Score is qualification enough for a loan.

Secondly, why does a loan make something affordable? I could go buy a mansion in the Hollywood Hills tomorrow if I had a loan, but I dare say I would find it affordable when the mortage payment was due.

I don't mean to pick on you Cartalas, I just find myself scraching my head saying "what the...?" every time you post.

I believe in this case you are proposing that if you demonstrate you are prepared (through high standardized test scores), you should have a state government guaranteed spot in a state university (of your choosing?) and furthermore, the state government should guarantee your student loans and that no other factor then your score on standardized tests should be a factor.

I don't think our state budgets could absorb the losses and it would be an administrative nightmare considering supply/demand and available spots in any given college's student body.

On the other hand, I admire the balls it would take to guarantee that any student who is willing and able can attend college. I just don't see it as realistic.

I never said I had all the answers but try this for securing the loans, Our Future are these children ( Black,White,Asian,Gay,Straight,Men and Women). The loans could be subsidised by large corporations that are willing and wanting to hire these people straight out of college. Listen we spend Billions and Billons on Space Research,Defense and combating the ever evil Weed.


Hell make Pot legal tax the shit out of it and use that money, I dont know what the answer is but if we can provide for a unwed mother with 10 kids we sure the hell can send a child to college.

[Voronwë]

i got an EVEN BETTER idea Cart.

Instead of spending millions of dollars fattening up the coffers of 200 year old universities with billion dollar endowments....how about spending money on public schools.

its just like the whole voucher thing. It doesnt fix the problem, it just makes it worse really. Schools that dont need money get it. Schools that need money dont get it.

As long as the manner in which public schools are funded is conducted in a racist and elitist manner, you are going to continue to have problems with limited upward mobility from low socio-economic starting points.

[Cartalas]

"Instead of spending millions of dollars fattening up the coffers of 200 year old universities with billion dollar endowments....how about spending money on public schools. "


Ok how about a policy where a teacher gets paid the same no matter if she or he is at School A or B.

Maybe public schools should be state run not local.

[vn_Tanc]

You're both starting to sound dangerously socialist!!!

Reminds of that Simpsons episode:

I'm gonna provide better education for your kids!
*approving murmurs*
But I'm gonna have to raise taxes to do it!
*disapproving grumbles*
But. . .the kids!
*approving murmurs*
However, taxes. . .
*disapproving grumbles*
Kids!
*approving murmurs*
Taxes!
*disapproving grumbles*

Best satire evar

[Cartalas]

Trust me im not trying to sound socialist but jesus christ if the problem is that lower income areas cant get the same education as higher income areas. the solutions are.

1. Move to higher income area ( Not all can)
2. We go back to bussing ( Dumbest idea since slavery)
3. Earmark money from the state to offset the difference.
4. Make it easy for large coporations to donate money to low income schools. I.E Tax break.

[Homercles]

You can throw all the money at the public schools that you want. It wont accomplish dick unless the parents of the students get involved in their childs education.

Right now, Cincinnati Public Schools are amoung the highest funded per student in the state of Ohio. Guess where they rank in graduation rates? Way down at the bottom along with the other major urban areas in the state

The most poorly funded school districts. The rural, backwater, wouldnt want to drive through that town for fear of Deliverence being rendered on your ass..they generally score in the middle of the pack.

Then theres the affluent suburbs of the major cities. Well funded. Strong family support system. They generally score the highest.

Family structure. Parental involvement is the main factor in a childs eduation. Not how much money your school gets from the taxpayers.
A book is a book is a book. You can read it in pristine airconditioned classrooms, just as easy as you can read it in a classroom that has cracked windows and missing ceiling tiles.


Homeschooling is becoming more common and more successful. Why is this? It sure aint all the taxpayers money being shipped to those households. Its because the parents are determined to see there child be educated. The parents are involved.

[masteen]

I'm still not understanding your thought process, what does a student who scrapes by HS for whatever reason(s) have to do w/ the collegiate and workforce AA programs?

Pushing for higher graduation rates doesn't necessarily correlate to more qualified college applicants.

I mentioned that the minority leaders here seemed to be more concerned with grad. rates than actual education of their children. It's a given that white politicos are only interested in numbers of minorities being churned through the system. You'd think that the leaders of these other groups would care about the kids, not numbers.

[noel]

Lots of good points have been raised, so I'd like to respond.

Chid: I don't think anything can, or should be done about private schools. If citizens are willing to contribute to the public education system, AND pay for private educations, they shouldn't be penalized for that. That problem will take care of itself eventually if the basic problem of poorly funded and equipped public schools is addressed. The real flaws are with the public school system, and the manner in which money is allocated to them. The money needs to be evenly divided state/countrywide, not the way it's done now.

Homercles: You make an excellent point as well. Nothing will change if the fundamental value systems in poor communities don't change. That is not to say that there are no values in the poor communities, but that perhaps due to the obstacles being faced by individuals in impoverished communities, things other than education might take a higher priority. I believe that if we were to show a genuine commitment to an equal and fair basic (K-12) educational system, and if we were to publicize it, and perhaps incentivize it with easier access to universities/community colleges, we could help to push the value system as well.

If you start out with the knowledge that your education is inferior, the odds can be surmountable. If you start out with the knowledge that you are on equal footing with anyone else, a competitive individual will have the hope to succeed.

[Jice Virago]

AA is a shit fix to a shit problem that will never go away completely. There really is no long term fix to it, either we bite the bullet and end it, or keep limping by with what we have. Its the WASP's fault for hating everyone different in the first place. It's also the minority's fault for being hypocritical and using stereotypes/discrimination when it was to their advantage. It has bread nearly as much resentment as it solved. I can't think of a realistic solution to the problem, honestly.

You do need to attack it in private schools for one reason. This is where the rich elite are mostly being educated and if they are being conditioned that discrimination is ok, then when they reach places of power they themselves will continue the trend.

This all doesn't even touch the begining of sexism which os just a whole other mess. I mean the problem with flatly stating men and women are the same seems nice as a part of liberal rhetoric, but as a social liberal even I have to say its bullshit. Women and men are different, physically and psychologically. They have differing areas of strenghts and weaknesses resulting in them being superior in certain tasks to one another. It's fucking biology. Both sexes deserve a fair shot at every job society has to offer, but at some point you have to give in to common sense and realize that given equal skill there are some tasks that each gender is just naturally superior at. This is one area where AA is basically flawed, in that it flies in the face of common sense. There should be more female CEOs and pilots and more male nurses and homemakers, Aa should help create these types of situations but its all wrapped up in the stupid shit.

[Kguku]

Just curious is the company you work for owned by a women?

The company I work for is owned by CIBC. CIBC is a publicly traded Financial Institution.

I'm sure there are plenty of women who own stock in CIBC, though not sure off the top of my head what the investors board is made up of.

[Zamtuk]

Hopefully not the women in your avatar.

[Cartalas]

Hopefully not the women in your avatar.

Nope thats the Board of Directors!