• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Group contemplating challenge to UNC Affirmative Action

There's no such thing as two 100% equally qualified candidates.

For the purposes of the thought exercise, if I was working admissions for a predominantly white school, and had two 100% equal candidates, I would probably admit the black one. If I was working admissions for a predominantly black school, I would probably admit the white one. People gain a lot from their education when they learn alongside people with diverse life experiences.
 
Playing the role of jhmd in tonight's performance, DistrictDeacon.

District, what criteria should be used to admit students? In other words, what does "qualified" mean?

What preferences should students get in college admissions?

Why do you favor less diversity?
 
DeaconSig said:
How does any college decide which student to accept between equally qualified candidates, regardless of skin color?
Click to expand...

They could do it by dick/booty size and get the same results and take the skin color out of the equation. Problem solved. You're welcome.
 
Race is only one factor. If you want to get rid of AA, then you must get rid of all preferences to make it fair. There would be no more legacies. You couldn't get in with lesser grades if your parents worked at the university. You couldn't get in if you are related to a donor. You'd have to have the same qualifications as a running back as you would if were a history student.

SAT scores these days are most indicative of how much money your parents have. Their next biggest use is to tell where you went to HS. They are less and less about actual ability.
 
RJKarl said:
Race is only one factor. If you want to get rid of AA, then you must get rid of all preferences to make it fair. There would be no more legacies. You couldn't get in with lesser grades if your parents worked at the university. You couldn't get in if you are related to a donor. You'd have to have the same qualifications as a running back as you would if were a history student.

SAT scores these days are most indicative of how much money your parents have. Their next biggest use is to tell where you went to HS. They are less and less about actual ability.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of interesting data on SAT scores these days:
education.png


income.png


ethnicity.png


psat.png
 
UNC-CH is effectively the only school in the state that is affected by AA. Almost everyone who wants to go to ASU or ECU is accepted. Sadly there aren't enough slots at UNC, Duke, Wake, and Davidson to accommodate every qualified and deserving applicant in the state, but those five schools aren't the only avenues to positive academic and financial outcomes. Nobody would rank University of Maryland above any of those schools, but somehow Google co-founder Sergey Brin managed to be admitted to Stanford's PhD program and become a billionaire despite doing his undergrad at a "lesser" school. It's why I thought the last AA case was so deeply flawed. An applicant with a 3.6 was denied admission to UT-Austin and ended up at LSU. Having to attend LSU is hardly a hardship considering that less than 40% of American adults older than 25 have four year degrees.

Personally I believe that diversity is a good thing, but that an inclusive meritocracy is the way to go. Instead of using race as a criteria, use family educational history/income as a variable, but one of several. I also think there's too much focus on flagship public universities schools and not enough on early childhood education. Does North Carolina not benefit if Chinese, East Indians, and Nigerians are over represented at Chapel Hill, but traditionally under represented racial and ethnic groups are over represented at Asheville, Wilmington, Charlotte, Greensboro, ASU, and ECU? It's about getting more people into the pool and finding the right fit for what people bring to the party based on their abilities.
 
When they got rid of AA in CA, the group most hurt in grad schools was women. The good old boys started making it more difficult for them to be accepted. Some even used Mad Manesque reasons that the seats were to valuable to give to women who might stop practicing law or medicine or being in the business world when they had kids.
 
One day we will no longer have AA, and upper middle class white kids will need a new excuse when they don't get accepted somewhere. I wonder what it might be.
 
PhDeac said:
Playing the role of jhmd in tonight's performance, DistrictDeacon.

District, what criteria should be used to admit students? In other words, what does "qualified" mean?

What preferences should students get in college admissions?

Why do you favor less diversity?
Click to expand...

If I were in charge of admissions I would strive to fill my classes with highly performing high school students, regardless of race.
 
So, if high performance is the only standard, no athletics program?
 
What is the standard for high performing high school students? Is that standard the same at every high school?

You didn't answer the last two questions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top