Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 286 posts

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#121

Post by hedora »

kube-system wrote: post #15
eli wrote: post #2

Quoted post unavailable.

There are plenty of liberal reasons to dislike race-based admission processes as well. I agree with the spirit of what these programs are trying to accomplish, but punishing Asian applicants for their race is a perfect example of what is wrong with this solution from a fundamental level.

I don't think that's the point.

This court has been shredding the rule of law in this country for the last year, and is systematically replacing our democracy with fascism.

Their ruling is definitely going to be more damaging to minorities than anything I can come up with.

Hell, they banned abortion by eliminating the right to privacy in the US.

They were even complete assholes about it. Despite being minority (and arguably illegally, in some cases) appointed, they blame the (underage) women their rulings victimize for not voting enough.

The text of the ruling explicitly states that no ruling the court makes could be sexist or victimize women, since women are allowed to vote.

I fully expect this ruling to use similar logic to blow an equally large hole in our constitutional rights.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#122

Post by anonAndOn »

LatteLazy wrote: post #106
anonAndOn wrote: post #94

If race is barred then the next method could be increased emphasis on perfect price discrimination to distinguish applicants socioeconomically. Outrageous tuition prices coupled with generous "scholarships" can also create a diverse student body.

Presumably if you cannot use race to decide who gets a place, you cannot use race to decide who get's a scholarship. At least as Harvard University, different rules might apply for the NAACP etc.

Who said anything about race? If you can afford Choate, you can afford $250k/year at Harvard. But the kid from Biloxi, MS gets a "scholarship" so she only pays $25k/yr.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#123

Post by thatfrenchguy »

kennend3 wrote: post #86
velavar wrote: post #57

I'm curious as to why affirmative action in the US has always been race-based and not economic-status or household income based? Asking as someone with no skin in the game; I'm merely curious if anyone has any constructive opinions on why they think economic status based affirmative action may/may not work?

Socioeconomic status is a much better goal if you want to "even the playing field" but it has serious flaws. The most obvious is it is incredibly easy to game: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/income... Any ideas on how students with no income managed to own $57 million in houses? Would these people qualify for a socio-economic advantage when applying for school?

This is pretty easy to bypass by looking at parents' tax returns from the past 20 years, plus their assets.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#124

Post by kevinsundar »

kennend3 wrote: post #86
velavar wrote: post #57

I'm curious as to why affirmative action in the US has always been race-based and not economic-status or household income based? Asking as someone with no skin in the game; I'm merely curious if anyone has any constructive opinions on why they think economic status based affirmative action may/may not work?

Socioeconomic status is a much better goal if you want to "even the playing field" but it has serious flaws. The most obvious is it is incredibly easy to game: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/income... Any ideas on how students with no income managed to own $57 million in houses? Would these people qualify for a socio-economic advantage when applying for school?

Race is easy to game too, in fact far easier. I know people who were around 5% Hispanic who would then write Hispanic on college applications. They're technically not lying.

There's also just plenty of people that just straight up lie about their race on college applications. It's not like its being verified at all.

I went to high school with a lot of White - Asian mixed kids. None of them wrote Asian on their college applications. I also knew a lot of Indians (like me) who'd select Other in order to avoid being denied opportunities due to being Asian.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#125

Post by tonystubblebine »

I look at this through the lens of the San Francisco public schools. When I went to the magnet high school there, Lowell, they had explicit race based standards. We all got scores out of 70 based on our standardized tests and middle school grades. The differences were pretty stark.

Chinese kids needed a 68, which could mean they got just one B. White kids needed a 62, black and latino even lower. So I totally get why Chinese families were screaming. The standards for them were way higher than for other races.

But also just as jarring, the middle schools that fed this system were incredibly biased. My middle school, Hoover, had a segregation system that split the school in half. The honors half had at most one black kid per grade. We even had a different lunch period.

The honors half was being groomed for schools like Lowell or at least to look at High School as an on ramp to college.

It's not like we didn't have a lot of black students. We actually bussed in two, maybe four busloads of black kids from another neighborhood. But only one of those was ever admitted to honors. I just can't believe that there were no kids on those busses that were smart. I knew a lot of them through sports and they were plenty smart, together, hard working.

If this level of segregation can happen in San Francisco, I can't imagine how bad it is in the rest of the country.

It's complicated, and you can have your own takeaway, but mine is that merit often defined wrong. I'm on the lookout for people who did more with less, or even did equal or near to it with less. To me, that is more a measure of merit than top line measures like test scores.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#126

Post by adastra22 »

ck2 wrote: post #24

> Nine US states - including California, Florida, Georgia and Michigan - currently prohibit the use of race as a factor in admissions for public universities Sounds like instead of doing polls on opinions and "gut think" that there are already large real-world examples that can be examined precisely to see what that policy does or doesn't accomplish.

At least in California, I don’t think there has been enough time to really know. It was a recent change iirc.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#128

Post by weberer »

fassssst wrote: post #66
kennend3 wrote: post #3

I so hope this is struck down. ""Americans have come to view diversity as integral to learning and to trust that the path to leadership is open to all," lawyers representing Harvard University wrote in a court filing." This is not true, and the Asians who were denied entry based on their race would agree. What ever happened to access based on merit?

Equal opportunity is more important than whatever “merit” means.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#129

Post by kennend3 »

AnonCoward42 wrote: post #120
kennend3 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socioeconomic status is a much better goal if you want to "even the playing field" but it has serious flaws. The most obvious is it is incredibly easy to game: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/income... Any ideas on how students with no income managed to own $57 million in houses? Would these people qualify for a socio-economic advantage when applying for school?

The term "socioeconomic" is really malleable, when in actuality you probably meant "low income" or "poor". This might be a better measure, but can be gamed also as you point out. This however doesn't necessarily mean the measure is bad.

No, i meant socioeconomic factors...

"What are socioeconomic examples? Social and economic factors, such as income, education, employment, community safety, and social supports can significantly affect how well and how long we live. These factors affect our ability to make healthy choices, afford medical care and housing, manage stress, and more."

Notice it includes "Income"? it includes other factors as well such as poor safety nets, etc.

Re: US Supreme Court to weigh end to race-based college admissions

#130

Post by HWR_14 »

legitster wrote: post #97
eli wrote: post #2

Quoted post unavailable.

> This is a conservative, outcomes-driven court. I find this view to be pretty naive. The vast majority of judges in the US legal system are naturally going to be conservative in that the job is to follow the letter of the law. To the extent that progressive justices move up through the legal system is only through political appointments. It seems easier to me to say the vast majority of progressive opinions from the…

> To the extent that progressive justices move up through the legal system is only through political appointments.

All federal and most state justices only move up through political appointments. The rest of state justices are directly elected, which is even more political.

Post reply on HN