End of Affirmative Action?

245

Replies

  • MelbourneMarkMelbourneMark Posts: 1,483 Officer
    One issue is that some of the colleges where using SAT scores; and penalizing Asians, while giving extra points to blacks/Hispanics. 


  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 1,414 Officer
    edited July 4 #33
    So in that scenario whatever applicant is a white male should have their odds of getting in lowered just because? 

    CAD, acceptance criteria isn't that hard.  All that university needs to do is decide if gpa, sat or experience is the most important...  what is second most important, etc.  once those metrics are spelled out, the applicants are easily ranked.  The key is to use the same metrics equally across all applicants.  What creates bias is when acceptance criteria changes.  

    It makes more sense for a university to say "we rank GPA first, experience second and SAT scores last for ALL candidates."  Versus a university saying "hey we change acceptance criteria on a whim solely based on the genotype of the applicant."  
  • dave44dave44 Posts: 6,939 Admiral
    cadman said:
    dave44 said:
    I’m sorry Cad , you didn’t tell me the race of the individuals, I’ll have to look harder so I can make a racist determination.
    I didn't say you used race or sex. I said you let your prejudice influence your decision. 

    I said racial and sexual prejudice can become a factor for some without them even realizing it. 

    They were separate statements. I guess you don't see your prejudice. 
       Apparently you withheld criteria about the right candidate, or you aren’t making your point very well.
         What I don’t see, what I can’t figure out, is why anyone thinks they can legislate human nature. And why would anyone think people without souls or original thoughts are better than the everyday life of humans. 
       Affirmative action is over, look at this new generation, they don’t care one way or the other, they just want to be a rap or **** star.
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 23,817 AG
    dave44 said:
    cadman said:
    dave44 said:
    I’m sorry Cad , you didn’t tell me the race of the individuals, I’ll have to look harder so I can make a racist determination.
    I didn't say you used race or sex. I said you let your prejudice influence your decision. 

    I said racial and sexual prejudice can become a factor for some without them even realizing it. 

    They were separate statements. I guess you don't see your prejudice. 
       Apparently you withheld criteria about the right candidate, or you aren’t making your point very well.
         What I don’t see, what I can’t figure out, is why anyone thinks they can legislate human nature. And why would anyone think people without souls or original thoughts are better than the everyday life of humans. 
       Affirmative action is over, look at this new generation, they don’t care one way or the other, they just want to be a rap or **** star.
    You were prejudiced against the 18 year old due to the fact he did have any "life" experience as you put it and would be easily influenced. You don't know that for a fact, 

    We can see another felt the military guy has the best life experience. All of these are opinions influenced by prejudice. 

    Mini Mart Magnate

  • dave44dave44 Posts: 6,939 Admiral
    So You would pick the 18 yo because they have the life and job experience you are looking for?
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 23,817 AG
    kellercl said:
    So in that scenario whatever applicant is a white male should have their odds of getting in lowered just because? 

    CAD, acceptance criteria isn't that hard.  All that university needs to do is decide if gpa, sat or experience is the most important...  what is second most important, etc.  once those metrics are spelled out, the applicants are easily ranked.  The key is to use the same metrics equally across all applicants.  What creates bias is when acceptance criteria changes.  

    It makes more sense for a university to say "we rank GPA first, experience second and SAT scores last for ALL candidates."  Versus a university saying "hey we change acceptance criteria on a whim solely based on the genotype of the applicant."  
    So if they all have the same GPA and SAT scores. There is always a subjective measurement to any selection criteria. It may be extra curricular activities or some other item. It is impossible to base the selection entirely or objective criteria. 

    Mini Mart Magnate

  • Soda PopinskiSoda Popinski GrovelandPosts: 8,205 Admiral
    Any decision based on race/religion/sex either positive or negative is wrong.  My son being denied entrance to a university because he's a white male is as bad as someone of color being denied for the same reasons of race/sex/religion.

    wrong is wrong is wrong.     

    Not for nothing but when my wife was unemployed she was filing out applications and checking the Caucasian box, and wasn't getting anywhere, when she checked the mixed race box, she started getting interviews and got a job within a week.   They say they don't use that information in hiring practices but they 1 million percent do.  Get rid of all of it and let the chips fall where they may. 
    People use statistics the way a drunk uses a street light, for support rather than illumination.
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 23,817 AG
    dave44 said:
    So You would pick the 18 yo because they have the life and job experience you are looking for?
    No, I would have went with your choices. But that is my prejudice in the selection process. 

    Many universities, in certain degree programs, like younger candidates for a variety of reasons, Some would choose the military experience. Candidate 2 would likely have the hardest time, but would still get his degree at a college, 

    There will always be people who claim they lost out because the other guy was a minority. In some cases it may be true, in many cases it was other factors that made the determination. 

    This topic focuses on affirmative action. As one poster said, minorities get points for being a minority. How about selection processes that give ex military extra points and overlooks better candidates to choose them based on that point system. Is that any more fair to better candidates than affirmative action? 

    Should every decision be based on nothing but objective criteria and if it the same for each candidate, then just flip a coin to make the selection random? 

    Mini Mart Magnate

  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 23,817 AG
    Any decision based on race/religion/sex either positive or negative is wrong.  My son being denied entrance to a university because he's a white male is as bad as someone of color being denied for the same reasons of race/sex/religion.

    wrong is wrong is wrong.     

    Not for nothing but when my wife was unemployed she was filing out applications and checking the Caucasian box, and wasn't getting anywhere, when she checked the mixed race box, she started getting interviews and got a job within a week.   They say they don't use that information in hiring practices but they 1 million percent do.  Get rid of all of it and let the chips fall where they may. 
    Any employer asking for race on an application and using it as part of the selection criteria is looking to get sued. That is a big no no of the EEOC. It is usually asked after employment is offered or asked on a separate form with a notice it is not required, 

    Some government agencies will include it on the application, but ti is not required to be filled out. 

    Mini Mart Magnate

  • Soda PopinskiSoda Popinski GrovelandPosts: 8,205 Admiral
    cadman said:
    Any decision based on race/religion/sex either positive or negative is wrong.  My son being denied entrance to a university because he's a white male is as bad as someone of color being denied for the same reasons of race/sex/religion.

    wrong is wrong is wrong.     

    Not for nothing but when my wife was unemployed she was filing out applications and checking the Caucasian box, and wasn't getting anywhere, when she checked the mixed race box, she started getting interviews and got a job within a week.   They say they don't use that information in hiring practices but they 1 million percent do.  Get rid of all of it and let the chips fall where they may. 
    Any employer asking for race on an application and using it as part of the selection criteria is looking to get sued. That is a big no no of the EEOC. It is usually asked after employment is offered or asked on a separate form with a notice it is not required, 

    Some government agencies will include it on the application, but ti is not required to be filled out. 
    no it was never required she just doesn't like to leave forms unfinished.   But she did find that checking a mixed race box always got her callbacks when checking Caucasian did not. 
    People use statistics the way a drunk uses a street light, for support rather than illumination.
  • pottydocpottydoc Posts: 2,061 Captain
    Right:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/03/trump-administration-is-breaking-from-obama-era-affirmative-action-policies.html

    Left:  https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/03/politics/trump-administration-college-admissions/index.html

    Center:  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-education-race/trump-to-urge-colleges-to-ignore-race-in-admissions-media-idUSKBN1JT1HO

    So, what do you think?  Should colleges use race (and other factors) to ensure diversity, or should race (and other things) not be a factor at all and instead only rely on objective measures of academic performance?

    Affirmative Action is nothing other than legal discrimination. The best qualifi d candidate for a position (college admission, job, whatever) should be offered said position. Until that happens, we will be discriminating against people. But, I,guess that's alright as long as that person is a white male.
  • kellerclkellercl Posts: 1,414 Officer
    edited July 4 #43
    cadman said:
    kellercl said:
    So in that scenario whatever applicant is a white male should have their odds of getting in lowered just because? 

    CAD, acceptance criteria isn't that hard.  All that university needs to do is decide if gpa, sat or experience is the most important...  what is second most important, etc.  once those metrics are spelled out, the applicants are easily ranked.  The key is to use the same metrics equally across all applicants.  What creates bias is when acceptance criteria changes.  

    It makes more sense for a university to say "we rank GPA first, experience second and SAT scores last for ALL candidates."  Versus a university saying "hey we change acceptance criteria on a whim solely based on the genotype of the applicant."  
    So if they all have the same GPA and SAT scores. There is always a subjective measurement to any selection criteria. It may be extra curricular activities or some other item. It is impossible to base the selection entirely or objective criteria. 
    How is extra curricular subjective?  Being a volunteer at a retirement home seems pretty objective to me and could easily be a measurable metric.  As an example 3 years volunteer trumps 2 years. 

    All people should be evaluated using the same acceptance criteria.  Metrics shouldn't vary based on race or gender.  We are making this process 10x harder and more complicated than it has to be.
  • GardawgGardawg Posts: 7,261 Admiral
    Affirmative Action was required because of blatant prejudice in hiring.

    Has blatant prejudice in hiring disappeared?

    Nope. 

    AA is an attempt to solve a problem.

    It has had some success but the only real solution is to end the war on drugs and start a war on poverty.  Skill training should be free.  And it should be based on economic need.  Poor people get free job training.  If you want to grow a garden then you have to nourish it. 
    “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.

    Heres Tom with the Weather.”
  • Soda PopinskiSoda Popinski GrovelandPosts: 8,205 Admiral
    Gardawg said:
    Affirmative Action was required because of blatant prejudice in hiring.

    Has blatant prejudice in hiring disappeared?

    Nope. 

    AA is an attempt to solve a problem.

    It has had some success but the only real solution is to end the war on drugs and start a war on poverty.  Skill training should be free.  And it should be based on economic need.  Poor people get free job training.  If you want to grow a garden then you have to nourish it. 
    How long has AA been in practice?   Has it solved literally anything at all?   All it does is force companies to hire a certain number of people based on appearance.   When you know you will get a job, and you know you cannot be fired because you are there solely due to your race, where is the incentive to work hard?  It's legal blackmail in reality, you have to hire and retain X number of Y employees.   
    People use statistics the way a drunk uses a street light, for support rather than illumination.
  • mplspugmplspug Lake Mary, FloridaPosts: 6,240 Admiral
    You really think if they take AA away colleges still aren't going to give minorities an upper hand?

    Should businesses be rewarded for diversity with tax breaks?  

    My answer might surprise some.  I say yes, depending on location.  However then an equal tax break must be available in areas where minorities are hard to find.

    Captain Todd Approves

  • conchydongconchydong Pompano BeachPosts: 3,548 Captain
    Ah, location, location, location. I worked in Miami for 25 years. The demo is 70% Hispanic, 19% Black and more or less 11% White (non Hispanic) yet I was considered a majority as far as hiring practices go. I am sure there are other locales that are similar in demographics. 

    “Everyone behaves badly--given the chance.”
    ― Ernest Hemingway

  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 23,817 AG
    edited July 4 #48
    mplspug said:
    You really think if they take AA away colleges still aren't going to give minorities an upper hand?

    Should businesses be rewarded for diversity with tax breaks?  

    My answer might surprise some.  I say yes, depending on location.  However then an equal tax break must be available in areas where minorities are hard to find.
    There are tax breaks for diversity. There is the Work Opportunity Credit for hiring targeted groups and the Empowerment zone credit for hiring those in certain neighborhoods. 

    Mini Mart Magnate

  • mplspugmplspug Lake Mary, FloridaPosts: 6,240 Admiral
    I know, but should there be?

    Captain Todd Approves

  • NewberryJeffNewberryJeff Posts: 7,045 Admiral
    Gardawg said:
    Affirmative Action was required because of blatant prejudice in hiring.

    Has blatant prejudice in hiring disappeared?

    Nope. 

    AA is an attempt to solve a problem.

    It has had some success but the only real solution is to end the war on drugs and start a war on poverty.  Skill training should be free.  And it should be based on economic need.  Poor people get free job training.  If you want to grow a garden then you have to nourish it. 
    Does someone else want to tell him, or should I?
  • Westwall01Westwall01 Posts: 4,687 Captain
    Not worth the effort......
  • Reptile DysfunctionReptile Dysfunction LP - Edge of the Known UniversePosts: 3,077 Captain
    edited July 4 #52
    Not worth the effort......
    Exactly.

    Wow, just wow.
    "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free" - P. J. O'Rourke
  • mplspugmplspug Lake Mary, FloridaPosts: 6,240 Admiral
    He left out the unicorn farming training and the rainbow trade.




     :) 

    Captain Todd Approves

  • ScoutboatScoutboat Posts: 1,751 Captain
    What did Dr. King say?  Judge a man by his character..................
    Character has nothing to do with the intelligence of a prospective college student.
  • GardawgGardawg Posts: 7,261 Admiral
    Well there is certainly a large contingent of ignorant white trash who seem determined to stay that way. 

    That may be an insurmountable problem.


    “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.

    Heres Tom with the Weather.”
  • fins4mefins4me Posts: 14,014 AG
    edited July 4 #56
    We have devalued a college diploma by flooding colleges and universities with individuals who really do not belong there. They are seeking degrees that will do nothing for them. This is often done with loans that they have little hope or plans of paying back and are guaranteed by the taxpayer,,,,,, it is idiotic. 
    ALLISON XB 21,, MERCURY 300 Opti Max Pro Series (Slightly Modified) You can't catch me!!!
    "Today is MINE"
  • mindyabinessmindyabiness Posts: 3,651 Captain
    Gardawg said:
    Affirmative Action was required because of blatant prejudice in hiring.

    Has blatant prejudice in hiring disappeared?

    Nope. 

    AA is an attempt to solve a problem.

    It has had some success but the only real solution is to end the war on drugs and start a war on poverty.  Skill training should be free.  And it should be based on economic need.  Poor people get free job training.  If you want to grow a garden then you have to nourish it. 
    I disagree with this part of this post.
    Please define blatant racism....

    How is it that you know this? Why do you think that blatant racism exists and to what extent do you think it can be eliminated if it exists in the first place.

    Even if there is some racism in this country, those people will always be there and they come in all colors and Nationalities. 
    There will always be people that hate and there will always be people that think this hatred can be removed through legislation.


    Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon... No matter how good you are, the bird is going to crap on the board and strut around like it won anyway. nj
  • pottydocpottydoc Posts: 2,061 Captain
    cadman said:
    You have three candidates applying for admission. The criteria for admission is a 4.0  GPA and a 1400 SAT score. 

    Applicant one - 4.2 GPA and a 1480 SAT score.  18 and just graduated. Class President and involved in many social  club activities at his high school. 

    Applicant two - 4.0 GPA and a 1500 SAT score. 22 because he took off four years after school to work and save money. Had a part time job in school and did a little social activities clubs in high school. 

    Applicant three - 4,0 GPA and 1400 on his SAT score. He is 23 years old because he spent 4 years in the military as soon as he graduated. 

    Who is the most qualified?

    Experience and abilities vary by individual. It is an opinion on which of these experiences and abilities makes them the most qualified. 

    I agree, under the current system, many may be passed over at one college for the sake of diversity. But none of those people are being denied an college education, it just might not be at the university they chose to apply to first. 

    Do you think people are being denied a college education any place due to diversity requirements? Do you think there is a dishwasher out there who had a 1600 SAT and 4.2 GPA crying he was denied an college education any place due to diversity? It ain't happening. He may have got turned down by Harvard, but there are lots of colleges that will take him. 


    Let's add canidate number four: GPA 3.8
    a decent amount of community service
    1100 SAT score
    18 years old
    minority female


    other canidares all white males


    Guess who gets in now. I'll give you a hint, it's not 1, 2, or 3. My youngest step son was trying to get grants to attend a Tech program at our local State college (Lake/Sumpter). After getting denied multiple times, the financial aid councilor, who had been tying very hard to get him some help, told him to resubmit everything, but to check the mixed rose box instead of the white one. Anyone want to,take a guess at what the results were then? Oh, by the way, she was a black lady. She told his mom flat out that he would get very little if anything, applying as a white male. He ended up choosing not to go, anyway, but it was defiantly a lesson in the way our government works. I can't say I was surprised, though. 
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,001 AG
    Gardawg said:
    Affirmative Action was required because of blatant prejudice in hiring.

    Has blatant prejudice in hiring disappeared?

    Nope. 

    AA is an attempt to solve a problem.

    It has had some success but the only real solution is to end the war on drugs and start a war on poverty.  Skill training should be free.  And it should be based on economic need.  Poor people get free job training.  If you want to grow a garden then you have to nourish it. 
    Affirmative Action is blatant predice and in the case where race is considered as part of the affirmative action then it is also racist. If you are giving someone a hand up because you think they cant do any better on their own due to their race then you are saying that you are superior to them... that is the purest definition of racism there is.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 10,179 AG
    edited July 5 #60

    4WARD said:

    Affirmative action is the ultimate generational copout.
    The grand poobah of participation trophies, you don't even have to show up.
    Not as much about who goes to college and who does not, as it is about making the parents and grandparents that did nothing for their children feel better.

    Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the topic.

    We'll mark you down in the "performance" column, your indignation is noted.

    However, I'd love to know which colleges "you don't even have to show up" that are filled with children whose parents "did nothing for them"?  Perhaps I have missed a more cynical tone not intended to be taken seriously, or you might explain a bit more what you meant by those expressions -- I'm not sure I follow.

    Thanks...Mike 
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 10,179 AG
    edited July 5 #61
    Gardawg said:
    Affirmative Action was required because of blatant prejudice in hiring.

    Has blatant prejudice in hiring disappeared?

    Nope. 

    AA is an attempt to solve a problem.

    It has had some success but the only real solution is to end the war on drugs and start a war on poverty.  Skill training should be free.  And it should be based on economic need.  Poor people get free job training.  If you want to grow a garden then you have to nourish it. 
    Affirmative Action is blatant predice and in the case where race is considered as part of the affirmative action then it is also racist. If you are giving someone a hand up because you think they cant do any better on their own due to their race then you are saying that you are superior to them... that is the purest definition of racism there is.
    So helping those discriminated against by society more purely defines discrimination than the discrimination itself?

    Are you sure you've thought this through, or have I understood you incorrectly?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file