😂😂Funny video
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFghNsxse6p/?igsh=MTRnZGNxMjVqczNmdQ==
They got bamboozled
-
42
-
Georgia Boy wrote:
😂😂Funny video
They got bamboozled
It's because Democrats / colleges are still discriminating against them.Asian students are being discriminated against by elite colleges even after the Supreme Court ruled affirmative action unconstitutional, the Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) group alleges.
Princeton, Yale, and Duke have come under scrutiny as the demographic breakdown of their incoming classes has barely budged despite the ruling, apart from a decline in Asian students, according to data published by the schools.
At Duke, the percentage of Asian students dropped from 35% to 29%, according to the New York Times, and at Yale it plummeted from 30% to 24%, their published statistics show. Black and Hispanic student percentages held steady at both....
“Our experts concluded that the elimination of race would cause a significant decline in the enrollment of African Americans and Hispanics and a significant boost to Asian Americans and to a lesser degree whites,” Blum explained. “That wasn’t really disputed by either party.”
...
Promising to investigate further, he added: “Based on SFFA’s extensive experience, your racial numbers are not possible under true neutrality,” he said in a letter sent to the three colleges.
“You are now on notice. Preserve all potentially relevant documents and communications.”269 -
"The skeptics’ best evidence is the fact that the universities accused of breaking the rules haven’t fully explained how they got their results. Yale, for example, has touted its use of the Opportunity Atlas, but hasn’t shared how it factors information from the tool into admissions decisions. Before the Court’s ruling, a Black student was four times more likely to get into Harvard than a white student with comparable scores, and a Latino applicant about twice as likely."
So these numbers would probably be 6x and 3x, respectively, higher for Asians.
95 -
And on schools reinstating SAT requirements to get better differentiators about students: “That could be the case when a student from a less-resourced background presents a high score. A different case would be a student whose score in absolute numerical terms is not as high but stands out as high among the typical SAT scores from comparable applicants at the student's high school.”
There are many good criticisms with affirmative action policies (both in general principle and in application of stated principles), but in leveling criticisms, many pull the pendulum too far in the other direction.
LRC: You can’t compare that cross country 5k time in heat mud with a 5,000 time on the BU track by someone on bicarb and in super shoes.
Also LRC: The SAT number should be read exactly the same for every kid so that we can call someone names if they do something disastrous like score a 1490 then level up once they get to their Ivy League school. That’s not fulfilling untapped potential that an admissions officer recognized; it’s a nefarious attempt to cultivate unfairness.
115 -
Unfortunately, Asians aren't in the Dem victimhood fraternity, so they get shafted.
2010 -
StopAsianHate wrote:
"The skeptics’ best evidence is the fact that the universities accused of breaking the rules haven’t fully explained how they got their results. Yale, for example, has touted its use of the Opportunity Atlas, but hasn’t shared how it factors information from the tool into admissions decisions. Before the Court’s ruling, a Black student was four times more likely to get into Harvard than a white student with comparable scores, and a Latino applicant about twice as likely."
So these numbers would probably be 6x and 3x, respectively, higher for Asians.
It’s conceivable that factoring in low-income status as an advantage leads to an increase in blacks or compensates for not explicitly using race anymore.
A student from a low-income family or with other documented hardships is arguably more meritorious than one with an upper middle class upbringing with comparable academic scores. You could quibble about whether the schools account for hardships fairly, but the principle of factoring in hardships is still merit-based and will favor minorities (though it can also favor low-income white students).
142 -
The Ivies are notorious for letting lots of one certain group into their colleges despite not having outstanding grades or test scores.
And it ain't the WASPs (it was 120 years ago).
713 -
From an X post:
“If you read the DEI initiatives from Google to Goldman Sachs, they go out of their way to mention that Asians are not part of an "underrepresented group".
As I said in another thread the Democrat party is no friend to Asians. They have to be crazy to keep voting for it.
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.147 -
bhah wrote:
StopAsianHate wrote:
"The skeptics’ best evidence is the fact that the universities accused of breaking the rules haven’t fully explained how they got their results. Yale, for example, has touted its use of the Opportunity Atlas, but hasn’t shared how it factors information from the tool into admissions decisions. Before the Court’s ruling, a Black student was four times more likely to get into Harvard than a white student with comparable scores, and a Latino applicant about twice as likely."
So these numbers would probably be 6x and 3x, respectively, higher for Asians.
It’s conceivable that factoring in low-income status as an advantage leads to an increase in blacks or compensates for not explicitly using race anymore.
A student from a low-income family or with other documented hardships is arguably more meritorious than one with an upper middle class upbringing with comparable academic scores. You could quibble about whether the schools account for hardships fairly, but the principle of factoring in hardships is still merit-based and will favor minorities (though it can also favor low-income white students).
Yeah, there are a lot of excuses for why Asians out perform blacks so dramatically. The low income one is bullsh!t too. Most Asians in these schools don’t come from privilege backgrounds.
Many also have the disadvantage not having English as the language spoken at home, but for some reason you never hear this brought up.
This post was edited 21 seconds after it was posted.128 -
Badcompany wrote:
bhah wrote:
It’s conceivable that factoring in low-income status as an advantage leads to an increase in blacks or compensates for not explicitly using race anymore.
A student from a low-income family or with other documented hardships is arguably more meritorious than one with an upper middle class upbringing with comparable academic scores. You could quibble about whether the schools account for hardships fairly, but the principle of factoring in hardships is still merit-based and will favor minorities (though it can also favor low-income white students).
Yeah, there are a lot of excuses for why Asians out perform blacks so dramatically. The low income one is bullsh!t too. Most Asians in these schools don’t come from privilege backgrounds.
Many also have the disadvantage not having English as the language spoken at home, but for some reason you never hear this brought up.
It’s cultural. Nigerians also do well, as one example. Valuing education is key for group-level success
183 -
Cultural values wrote:
Badcompany wrote:
Yeah, there are a lot of excuses for why Asians out perform blacks so dramatically. The low income one is bullsh!t too. Most Asians in these schools don’t come from privilege backgrounds.
Many also have the disadvantage not having English as the language spoken at home, but for some reason you never hear this brought up.
It’s cultural. Nigerians also do well, as one example. Valuing education is key for group-level success
Nigerians send over their elites. That’s why they do so well. This isn’t the case with Asians to nearly the same extent.
Nice Virtue Signaling tho. 👍
713 -
They are still trying to achieve the same diversity, but instead of focusing on race, they focus on things like zip codes. By shifting their standard to economic rather than racial diversity they figure they can get away with it. Now they are getting denied entry because they are rich rather than what race they are.
32 -
Shocker: Blum and SFFA don't really care about Asian Americans. They were fighting to get more spots for white people and they succeeded. And it turns out that if you are the group that gets admitted at the highest rates, you're not victims, and you'd be better off not attaching yourself to a racist lawsuit against the private institutions that you desperately want to attend -- and that you believe you have a right to attend over people whose credentials don't look perfect according to the two factors that make you look superior.
43 -
joedlrt wrote:
They are still trying to achieve the same diversity, but instead of focusing on race, they focus on things like zip codes. By shifting their standard to economic rather than racial diversity they figure they can get away with it. Now they are getting denied entry because they are rich rather than what race they are.
What’s the problem with that? A student raised by a single mother and working 6 hours a day to support the family with a 1470 SAT and 3.9 GPA versus a $200K+ family income student with a 1510 SAT and 4.0 GPA: who would you pick? I’d say it’s not obvious and would want to look deeper. Hardship normalization is not anti-merit.
92 -
StopAsianHate wrote:
Georgia Boy wrote:
😂😂Funny video
They got bamboozled
It's because Democrats / colleges are still discriminating against them.Asian students are being discriminated against by elite colleges even after the Supreme Court ruled affirmative action unconstitutional, the Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) group alleges.
Princeton, Yale, and Duke have come under scrutiny as the demographic breakdown of their incoming classes has barely budged despite the ruling, apart from a decline in Asian students, according to data published by the schools.
At Duke, the percentage of Asian students dropped from 35% to 29%, according to the New York Times, and at Yale it plummeted from 30% to 24%, their published statistics show. Black and Hispanic student percentages held steady at both....
“Our experts concluded that the elimination of race would cause a significant decline in the enrollment of African Americans and Hispanics and a significant boost to Asian Americans and to a lesser degree whites,” Blum explained. “That wasn’t really disputed by either party.”
...
Promising to investigate further, he added: “Based on SFFA’s extensive experience, your racial numbers are not possible under true neutrality,” he said in a letter sent to the three colleges.
“You are now on notice. Preserve all potentially relevant documents and communications.”Lol!
“We are being discriminated against and our proof is there weren’t more of us admitted!”
24 -
The Dirty Duck wrote:
Shocker: Blum and SFFA don't really care about Asian Americans. They were fighting to get more spots for white people and they succeeded. And it turns out that if you are the group that gets admitted at the highest rates, you're not victims, and you'd be better off not attaching yourself to a racist lawsuit against the private institutions that you desperately want to attend -- and that you believe you have a right to attend over people whose credentials don't look perfect according to the two factors that make you look superior.
How so? What % Asian would schools be if not for affirmative action? If a group would be roughly 47% of a school if solely due to merit yet is capped at 25-35% via an unofficial quota system, then it’s discrimination.
91 -
Newname wrote:
The Ivies are notorious for letting lots of one certain group into their colleges despite not having outstanding grades or test scores.
And it ain't the WASPs (it was 120 years ago).
Are you referring to the group with the highest percentage of Nobel prize winners? You must be jealous.
44 -
bhah wrote:
What’s the problem with that? A student raised by a single mother and working 6 hours a day to support the family with a 1470 SAT and 3.9 GPA versus a $200K+ family income student with a 1510 SAT and 4.0 GPA: who would you pick? I’d say it’s not obvious and would want to look deeper. Hardship normalization is not anti-merit.
Giving people a 310 or 450 point SAT boost based on their race is anti-merit.
143
2 posts were removed from this page.
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.