Affirmative Action (and so on.)

thirdhour · Post by **thirdhour** » 2/27/2003, 10:52 pm

i don't really know what that means, but i'm guessing grade 9 and 10. but aren't SAT's a huge part of getting in to college?

2+2=5 · Post by **2+2=5** » 2/27/2003, 11:34 pm

Oh, yeah. Grades nine and ten. I don't know, our school makes it sound like you won't be successful at all unless you do outstanding up until 11th grade. sat scores do play a part, too. But as you can see, there's a lot of political shit surrounding it also.

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 2/28/2003, 12:31 am

thirdhour wrote:(what the hell is up with this 3.8/4.0 system and SATs? percentages (canada) just make sense!)

thirdhour wrote:i don't really know what that means, but i'm guessing grade 9 and 10. but aren't SAT's a huge part of getting in to college?

Ok, first off.
The 4.0 scale is used to represent grades with (generally) an A (or A+) being a 4.0, a B+ is a 3.5, B is 3.0, C+ is 2.5 and so on. Of course, if your school takes minuses into account it will be different, generally with A- as 3.66, B+ as 3.33, and so on.
This tends to work better as in many classes (particularly college level) the average grade isn't a high B/low A. In my engineering classes, I've seen tests with the average below 70, simply because the subject matter is so challenging, and the demands are so high. So a 65 could very well be a C, which would mean A's could go from 85-100. Using percentages, employers/grad schools/colleges would see an 85, when you did the work to earn an A.
Bascially, the 4.0 system is used so that it's easier for teachers to grade on a scale.

Second: The SAT'S and ACT's are standardized tests that give colleges another way of looking at intellegence, kinda a second opinion. I have a friend who went to a private (read: much much much more challenging than public) school, and he had a 3.4 GPA. He scored a 32 on his ACTs (highest is a 36, average is usually around 23), so admission boards could notice that he is a bright kid, and take a look at why his GPA isn't as high.

TheWorldIsASubway wrote:I was actually planning on going to U of M.
but I'm white.
Forget that.

From the first post in the damn thread:
"The University's admissions system is based on a 150-point system, which
takes into account grade-point average, standardized test scores, and
various "non-academic" factors, awarding points to each. One-hundred points
are typically required to gain admission, but 20 of these points are awarded
to non-economically challenged minorities, thus assisting middle and
upper-middle class minority applicants only. Thus, these applicants only
need 80% of the points of non-minority competitors."
If you're qualified, you'll get in. Yes, you have to work 20 points harder than a minority. If you're still smart enough, you'll get in.
Take a deep breath, and actually read the damn thread before posting.

emily · Post by **emily** » 2/28/2003, 9:27 am

yay USC! it really does seem the perfect college for me, well I mean I looked at all the courses they offer, and a lot of it has to do with arts and communication, which is my "career pathway". damn michigan Career Focused Education. i say its all a waste of time.

Sufjan Stevens · Post by **Sufjan Stevens** » 2/28/2003, 10:55 am

Yeah, Narbus, calm down. Who are you to be a dick to some one on here? You'd be shocked, but those extra 20 points do mean a lot. Stop and think about it, the minorities that are qualified enough get in before anyone else, then that leaves a certain amount of spots to a bunch of non-minorities with all qualified grades, and that will leave some one out. By all means, I should have gotten in, and if I were black or Indian, I would have scored a scholarship, but no, I am white. I am also lower middle-class. I don't live in a nice city, and apparently, I don't have enough to offer U of M, so I was left out.

Anyone should apply to U of M, I mean, if you're smart or exceptionally good at a sport, you might have a chance to get in. Don't give up trying to get in because U of M is racist in trying to end racism that doesn't really exist.

The SAT's don't really matter when it comes to getting into college. If you're going for an elite college or an East Coast school (or is it west coast, I can't remember) you'll need the SAT, but besides that, the ACT is good enough. Especially if you can score a 28 or above on the ACT and you fucking loathe word analogies as much as I do.

megxyz128 · Post by **megxyz128** » 2/28/2003, 3:08 pm

Emily wrote:yay USC! it really does seem the perfect college for me, well I mean I looked at all the courses they offer, and a lot of it has to do with arts and communication, which is my "career pathway". damn michigan Career Focused Education. i say its all a waste of time.

Yeah, I had to do the whole Career Pathway thing, in fact we're still doing it. My school is very adament about those damn career pathways...

Sufjan Stevens · Post by **Sufjan Stevens** » 2/28/2003, 3:14 pm

Yeah, I got lawyer and business administrator, and my major was business administration and a minor in law, go figure?

emily · Post by **emily** » 2/28/2003, 3:20 pm

We just started it, and freshmen have the most to do. As I mentioned earlier, I'm Arts & Communication.

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 2/28/2003, 3:55 pm

Mister Chainsaw wrote:Yeah, Narbus, calm down. Who are you to be a dick to some one on here? You'd be shocked, but those extra 20 points do mean a lot. Stop and think about it, the minorities that are qualified enough get in before anyone else, then that leaves a certain amount of spots to a bunch of non-minorities with all qualified grades, and that will leave some one out. By all means, I should have gotten in, and if I were black or Indian, I would have scored a scholarship, but no, I am white. I am also lower middle-class. I don't live in a nice city, and apparently, I don't have enough to offer U of M, so I was left out.

Unless the first article was totally wrong, then this is how I see U of M's AA program working:
Based off a 150 point system that takes into account MANY factors, including race, you generally need to earn 100 points for acceptance. So, if you had a 90, and a minority had a (prebonus) 90, then you will typically be passed over, as the bonus would knock the minority student up to 110. But if you had a 110, and a minority had a (prebonus) 90, then you have equal chances to get in, as you'd then have the same final score.
TheWorldIsASubway's post made it seem that simply because he was white, there was no chance for him to get in, which is entirely untrue. The truth of it is that he'd have to work harder than a minority to get in, which is unfair, yes.
My point was that if you feel this is a problem, focus on real reasons that it's a problem. The fact that it's unfair is a problem. The fact that it sends a (admittedly subtle) message that minorities just aren't as smart as the majority is a problem. The fact that there's more racial diversity between a white mechanic from the Bronx and a white farmer from Kansas than there is between a black and a white student from the same neighborhood shows that the notion of "preserving diversity" with this system is flawed provides a problem.
Saying there's no chance of getting in because you're white is neither accurate nor an actual problem.

2+2=5 · Post by **2+2=5** » 2/28/2003, 11:22 pm

I'm sorry.
I didn't mean it like that at all. I'm just pointing out that it is a factor in admission. I shouldn't be sarcastic like that.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » 5/4/2004, 2:49 pm

I was going to start my own thread about AA...........but I see one was started QUITE a while ago.

For those of you that support Affirmative Action, I'm somewhat curious to know your reasonings.

We had a debate in Government yesterday about it, and people had pretty weak support.

Solidarity 9-6347 · Post by **Solidarity 9-6347** » 5/4/2004, 7:54 pm

Don't get me started.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » 5/4/2004, 11:35 pm

Idealist wrote:Don't get me started.

Support or no??? If you support.......I'd rather you get started.

Solidarity 9-6347 · Post by **Solidarity 9-6347** » 5/5/2004, 11:28 am

I definitely do not support affirmative action. I am definitely bombarded daily with hippies willing to lay their lives on the line to keep it part of our school admissions policy. Such is the life of a U of M A2 student.

starseed_10 · Post by **starseed_10** » 5/5/2004, 8:27 pm

i'm with you guys. there's just no justification

Neil · Post by **Neil** » 5/6/2004, 10:18 am

I guess one thing that bothers me.......is that people who support AA feel that we "owe it" to other ethnic backgrounds??? The only ethnicity that we OWE much of anything to (as far as own dirt under our feet) is the Native Americans.

I feel that AA has gotten rediculously outta control. I could give you many reasons why I feel that AA has become a "scapegoat" for our society.

modern psychokitty · Post by **modern psychokitty** » 5/9/2004, 9:45 am

I go to Georgia Tech. For an out-of-state student to get in, you need to be more qualified than someone from Georgia, pay more than double the tuition, and, if you're international like me, you get slotted into the last registration times.

But half those kids from Georgia fail or drop out anyway, and the school *definitely* knows that. In fact, they're probably counting on it.

Universities plan for that kind of thing all the time. At the University of Saskatchewan, engineers get weeded out first year, but commerce students get weeded out their third year. The school get the money, and they're blame-free. It's your own fault if you fail, after all.

Now, I can't completely confirm this, but I'm told that some schools, including UBC, make sure kids' grades drop just enough that they can't keep their scholarship. Once you're already there for a year, you're probably a lot more likely to scrape up the cash for school than you are before you start and can just go somewhere cheaper.

As for Title IX, think of it this way. You're the second boy in a family of three, with an older brother and a younger sister. Your brother plays football, and you play tennis. As your little sister starts getting older, she decides she wants to play softball, but your parents can't quite afford that. Would they tell you that you can't play tennis anymore because of your sister, or make her pay her own way while continuing to pay for you and your brother?

Most reasonable families would tell each child that they have to cut back a little. Maybe your brother can only go to one football camp this summer, or your your sister will have to make her glove last an extra season. Sure, that kinda sucks too, but it's infinitely better than not getting to play at all. Colleges are just pretending that isn't an option, and using Title IX as a scapegoat, because they WILL NOT cut funding for football. (Usually because alumni would get upset and donate less money if football's not doing well.)

My solution? Communism.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » 5/9/2004, 11:00 am

modern psychokitty wrote:
My solution? Communism.

*cough* good luck on that *cough*

modern psychokitty · Post by **modern psychokitty** » 5/9/2004, 5:54 pm

*cough* it was a joke *cough*