Explaining Privilege: It may not be what you think.

[TomC]

While it appears as if we've gone way off of the topic again, I think that SAT scores are bullshit and should be ended. For example, I scored higher than some of my straight A friends when I was in high school, simply because I'm good at taking that type of test. My son on the other hand had terrible SAT scores, yet he was able to graduate with honors when he finished his BS in Computer Science, a field that I would never have been able to understand well enough to finish a degree.

Wealthy people spend lots of money helping their children prepare for SATs and they frequently take them several times. until they get higher schools. SAT scores are often meaningless when it comes to who will do well in college and who will drop out or fail. They are a relic of the past, imnsho.

Success in college has a lot to do with perseverance and discipline. My husband, who is very smart and had good SAT scores flunked out of college on his first attempt. He partied too much and didn't know what direction he wanted to take. Luckily, I didn't know him during those years. After working for a year or two, he returned to school and completed a degree in engineering, a field that. he loved.

College admissions criteria shouldn't be made based on some random peoples' personal anecdotes. If the SAT goes away, then you'll have to assess academic achievement based solely on grades. Will that help give minorities a better shot at getting into elite colleges? I don't see how. Or maybe it should come down to how touching of an essay you write describing how many old people you help cross the street in your spare time and kittens you've rescued.

Shouldn’t a private university get to pick what its criteria are for entry? If they think they’d like to have students with characteristics other than high SAT scores, isn’t that their prerogative? If you don’t like it you can choose a different college. Or spend more time saving kittens.

Is there still an entirely private university any more? I'm unaware of it, if there is one.

Name a university that doesn't receive taxpayer funds, either the institution itself or the students. Just one. I don't think you can.
Tom

 

[Shadowy Man]

If a private university takes public money, it’s held to the same standard as a public university. Other criteria are fine. The issue is whether a person’s skin color should be a criterion. If you feel racial discrimination is okay, just say so.

I didn’t say anything about race. I just don’t think SAT scores should be the sole criterion for college entry.

Thebeave seemed to be denigrating “personal anecdotes” as a valid criterion while that may indeed be a valid criterion if a college wants specific aspects of character in its students.

 

[Trausti]

Shouldn’t a private university get to pick what its criteria are for entry? If they think they’d like to have students with characteristics other than high SAT scores, isn’t that their prerogative? If you don’t like it you can choose a different college. Or spend more time saving kittens.

Is there still an entirely private university any more? I'm unaware of it, if there is one.

Name a university that doesn't receive taxpayer funds, either the institution itself or the students. Just one. I don't think you can.
Tom

Hillsdale.

 

[Politesse]

I'm fine with socioeconomic, gender, and racial diversity being a goal of university recruitment, as long as the target is better inclusion of under-represented groups, not discrimination against particular groups.

 

[TomC]

Shouldn’t a private university get to pick what its criteria are for entry? If they think they’d like to have students with characteristics other than high SAT scores, isn’t that their prerogative? If you don’t like it you can choose a different college. Or spend more time saving kittens.

Is there still an entirely private university any more? I'm unaware of it, if there is one.

Name a university that doesn't receive taxpayer funds, either the institution itself or the students. Just one. I don't think you can.
Tom

Hillsdale.

I've heard of it, but I don't know anything about it.

I actually attended a private college, Wabash College. It's all male. When state student aid was threatened by the SJWs, the administration launched a fund drive. So the administration could provide financial aid. It was extremely successful, and Wabash is still all male.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

Hillsdale.

I've heard of it, but I don't know anything about it.

"Hillsdale College is a private conservative college in Hillsdale, Michigan. Founded in 1844 by abolitionists known as Free Will Baptists, it has a liberal arts curriculum that is based on the Western heritage as a product of both the Greco-Roman culture and the Judeo-Christian tradition.[4] Hillsdale requires every student, regardless of concentration of studies, to complete a core curriculum that includes courses on the Great Books, the U.S. Constitution, biology, chemistry, and physics.[5]

Since the late 20th century, in order to opt out of federal affirmative action policies, Hillsdale has been among a small number of US colleges to decline governmental financial support, instead depending entirely on private funding to supplement students' tuition."

(wiki)



They like 'em white.
Bet you're surprised that Trausti would come up with that, eh?

 

[Toni]

How does Harvard discriminate against black students? Can you describe an instance of this discrimination?



Please describe an instance of this alleged discrimination, for those of us who are ignorant of such discrimination.

I'm sorry that you still are not able to grasp US university admissions but again, that's not my problem. It's not even your problem as you are not seeking admissions to any university in the US as far as I know.

Are you seeking admission to any university in the US? Could you any more plainly be trying to deflect debate by screeching "stay in your lane"?

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/6/22/harvard-racist-email-equity-prime-mortgage/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ofessor-portraits-investigated-as-hate-crime/

https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/about-radcliffe/our-work/harvard-and-the-legacy-of-slavery

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/10/2/ngauv-harvard-built-slavery/


I am not currently seeking admissions to any university in the US or elsewhere but I have attended 3 different universities; my husband is currently teaching at a university and has taught at other universities and attended university and a different graduate school at another university. Our children have all attended 2 universities and one has completed law school. Among our friends is included admissions counselors, etc. One branch of our family attended Ivy League universities, something that neither my husband nor myself or our children seriously considered for ourselves. I was offered admissions to a couple of fancy ass schools but for various reasons, including personal preference, financial reasons and family reasons, I never considered applying to most of them. I had very high SAT scores and graduated 2nd in my class so I got lots of invitations. One I almost wish I had attended, but honestly, the primary focus of that university was not where I wanted to go as a student. But I do love that city....But even at 18, I knew wanting to live in a particular city was a poor reason to choose a school if it wasn't an otherwise good fit for what I wanted to do. I might have more seriously considered some of these options if a difficult family situation at home had not made it imperative that I remain within an hour or so of home. But who knows? I fell in love with a campus that I used to pass when going fishing with my dad and it turned out that it was excellent in areas I was interested in pursuing so, that's where I went.

My siblings and their children have all attended universities and in some cases, also graduate schools and professional schools. Many of my friends are also university graduates (as well as graduates of professional schools or graduate schools) as are their children (or are currently students).

I'm pretty familiar with university admissions in the United States.

 

[Emily Lake]

Ask any conservative or "moderate", they'll swear up and down that everyone already has equal rights.

I really hate it when social issues that are complex get turned into partisan mudflinging.

I'm a moderate. Liberal on some topics, conservative on others, never particularly extreme about any of them. I get tired of being lambasted as if I'm some sort of pariah with oozing sores simply because I don't conform to every fucking progressive talking point. It's stupid to just lump people together and to decide that all of your opponents are the same in every way, and then proceed to denigrate and demonize them.

So you disagree?

Who, specifically, do you think doesn't have equal rights under the law?

Women don't have fully equal rights. Gay and Lesbian people don't have fully equal rights. Transgender people don't have fully equal rights, although that is a much more complicated topic. And while racial minorities, particularly black people, have equal rights on paper, they don't have effective equality in practice.

 

[Emily Lake]

So you disagree?

Who, specifically, do you think doesn't have equal rights under the law?

In the US?

Females have the right not to have their genitals mutilated at birth, whereas males do not.

Actually... no, we don't. There are several bills coming into consideration right now to make female genital mutilation illegal and an act of child abuse.

 

[Emily Lake]

You missed an important qualifier: "on a big enough scale to matter".

Matter to whom?

That's exactly the question, isn't it?

 

[Emily Lake]

No, it does not. Based on academic aptitude and achievement, it favours black students and discriminates against white and Asian students.

Unless--and I cannot believe you would be playing this bait and switch equivocation game and I hope you are not--you mean that of all the black applicants to Harvard, some are admitted and some are turned down, so that Harvard has 'discriminated' by choosing some black students over other black students.

"Privilege"

A review of SAT and ACT standardized test scores among students in a recent class at the nation’s
200 most selective colleges finds that if all students were admitted solely on the basis of their test
scores and no new seats were added, 53 percent of incoming students at the nation’s most selective
colleges would no longer be attending (Figure 1). These students had median test scores that were
110 points below the median of all students at selective colleges (1140, compared to 1250). More than
half of the students who would be ousted are affluent students—from families in the top quartile of
socioeconomic status (SES)

If those students were ousted and replaced by applicants with higher test scores, however, the student
bodies of America’s most selective colleges would become even more aristocratic. Now, 60 percent
of incoming freshmen at selective colleges are from the top quartile of family SES, but that would
increase to 63 percent if students were admitted based on standardized test scores alone.

In addition to having more affluent students, selective colleges would become notably less racially
diverse. The White enrollment would grow by about 14 percent. Meanwhile, the combined Black and
Latino enrollment at selective colleges would be reduced by 43 percent, and Asian enrollment would
decline as well—by about 9 percent.

SAT Only Admission

Rather than taking the very shallow view that Harvard is actively discriminating, consider a just barely more complicated process, that looks at both test scores AND family income.

Consider two cohorts of applicants: One cohort comes from wealthy families and the other cohort comes from poorer families.

• Do you think it's reasonable to suspect that the wealth cohort would have access to considerably higher quality primary and secondary education, with a much higher proportion of private schools and a much higher likelihood of having had test prep classes and personal tutors to help them achieve high scores on their SATs and ACTs?
• Do you think it's reasonable to suspect that the poorer cohort would have had basic public school educations, with much less access to intensive tutoring and exam prep?
• Do you think that there's likely to be a differential in the racial profile of those two groups?

If Harvard is making entrance decisions on both exam scores AND family income, do you think that when the SAT scores alone are sliced by race, there might be an economic and educational privilege factor that gets obscured?

 

[southernhybrid]

Disagree. SAT scores are not a meaningful way to tell who will succeed at school. They need to be done away with and I'm glad that quite a few schools are no longer using them as part of the criteria for acceptance to school.

Still, most anyone can attend a community college for two years and then with good grades move up to a four year college. I also think that schools that are supposed to be the best are vastly over rated. Look at the idiots like Cruz and Hawley who have degrees from Harvard or Stanford for an example. What the fuck did they learn in school, other than how to be effective assholes?

I agree that many things can be taken into consideration when deciding who is a good candidate for any school.

 

[Emily Lake]

They like 'em white.
Bet you're surprised that Trausti would come up with that, eh?

Ehh... that may not be a result of a preference for a particular ethnic group, so much as a religious or a curriculum background that is unattractive to some ethnicities. I went to Creighton in Nebraska for my masters, and it's almost completely white. I don't think that's because there's any real racism involved though, more a result of it being a jesuit school, and their Undergrad programs require church attendance.

 

[Toni]

Disagree. SAT scores are not a meaningful way to tell who will succeed at school. They need to be done away with and I'm glad that quite a few schools are no longer using them as part of the criteria for acceptance to school.

Still, most anyone can attend a community college for two years and then with good grades move up to a four year college. I also think that schools that are supposed to be the best are vastly over rated. Look at the idiots like Cruz and Hawley who have degrees from Harvard or Stanford for an example. What the fuck did they learn in school, other than how to be effective assholes?

I agree that many things can be taken into consideration when deciding who is a good candidate for any school.

I would like to offer this caveat about doing your first two years at a community college and then going to a 4 year school.

Based upon my own observations when I last went to university and was in class and even partnered up in a lab class with students who had done the community college first route AND additionally, what I've heard from my spouse and other profs is that at least in our state, community colleges do not actually provide the same level of education/preparation for upper division courses as similarly named courses at a 4 year university. My former lab partner struggled mightily and was extremely confused because she had aced all of her community college classes---and was entirely unable to keep up with a light load of upper division classes at a 4 year university. Similar thing with other students who had done their first two years in community college. It is actually as big a step up as it is to go from high school to 4 year college. It can really throw off students who think they are much better prepared than they really are.

My spouse and his colleagues have to deal with students who *think* they have taken intro to (insert whatever course you'd like) and are ready for the upper division level because the course names are the same, but even where the same books are used in courses, community college teachers typically cover less than half of what a 4 year university professor covers in the same course and in less depth. But universities in my state are expected to accept as full credits say, intro to accounting I and II at a community college as intro into accounting I and II at a 4 year university although the community Intro to accounting I & II combined comprises less than half a semester of Intro to Accounting I at the university.

This is not a big deal if you are taking some general education classes that you MUST take to graduate but are not related to your major and that you don't particularly care about anyway. But it's a bad place to take intro classes or foundation classes for your major or a potential major. You could well find yourself way behind and that's a terrible place to be.

Again: caveat that this is all anecdotal based upon my observations and what I hear from professors at the local university. Mileage may vary.

 

[Toni]

They like 'em white.
Bet you're surprised that Trausti would come up with that, eh?

Ehh... that may not be a result of a preference for a particular ethnic group, so much as a religious or a curriculum background that is unattractive to some ethnicities. I went to Creighton in Nebraska for my masters, and it's almost completely white. I don't think that's because there's any real racism involved though, more a result of it being a jesuit school, and their Undergrad programs require church attendance.

Plenty of black and Hispanic and Asian Catholics. But Nebraska is largely white. Most students tend to attend university programs that are geographically close to home.

 

[Politesse]

So you disagree?

Who, specifically, do you think doesn't have equal rights under the law?

Women don't have fully equal rights. Gay and Lesbian people don't have fully equal rights. Transgender people don't have fully equal rights, although that is a much more complicated topic. And while racial minorities, particularly black people, have equal rights on paper, they don't have effective equality in practice.

Ah, in practice. That'd be the important point. So why might one group have different rights in practice than what the law prescribes?

 

[Metaphor]

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/6/22/harvard-racist-email-equity-prime-mortgage/

Gospa moja, did you read this?

For those playing at home, this was a spam email attack, originating from outside the university, where somebody spoofed Equity Prime Mortgage as sender.

To call this 'Harvard discriminating against blacks' is moronic. Harvard had nothing to do with it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ofessor-portraits-investigated-as-hate-crime/

An unknown person defaced the portraits of black law faculty and Harvard swiftly condemned it.

To call this 'Harvard discriminating against blacks' is moronic. Harvard had nothing to do with it.

https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/about-radcliffe/our-work/harvard-and-the-legacy-of-slavery


https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/10/2/ngauv-harvard-built-slavery/

There is literally no story here at all.

I am not currently seeking admissions to any university in the US or elsewhere but I have attended 3 different universities; my husband is currently teaching at a university and has taught at other universities and attended university and a different graduate school at another university. Our children have all attended 2 universities and one has completed law school. Among our friends is included admissions counselors, etc. One branch of our family attended Ivy League universities, something that neither my husband nor myself or our children seriously considered for ourselves. I was offered admissions to a couple of fancy ass schools but for various reasons, including personal preference, financial reasons and family reasons, I never considered applying to most of them. I had very high SAT scores and graduated 2nd in my class so I got lots of invitations. One I almost wish I had attended, but honestly, the primary focus of that university was not where I wanted to go as a student. But I do love that city....But even at 18, I knew wanting to live in a particular city was a poor reason to choose a school if it wasn't an otherwise good fit for what I wanted to do. I might have more seriously considered some of these options if a difficult family situation at home had not made it imperative that I remain within an hour or so of home. But who knows? I fell in love with a campus that I used to pass when going fishing with my dad and it turned out that it was excellent in areas I was interested in pursuing so, that's where I went.

My siblings and their children have all attended universities and in some cases, also graduate schools and professional schools. Many of my friends are also university graduates (as well as graduates of professional schools or graduate schools) as are their children (or are currently students).

I'm pretty familiar with university admissions in the United States.

That's a lovely anecdote, but I'm afraid you took away entirely the wrong message. Whether you are planning to attend Harvard, or any university in the United States in the near future is irrelevant to whether your arguments are sound.

 

[Metaphor]

"Privilege"



SAT Only Admission

Rather than taking the very shallow view that Harvard is actively discriminating, consider a just barely more complicated process, that looks at both test scores AND family income.

Consider two cohorts of applicants: One cohort comes from wealthy families and the other cohort comes from poorer families.

• Do you think it's reasonable to suspect that the wealth cohort would have access to considerably higher quality primary and secondary education, with a much higher proportion of private schools and a much higher likelihood of having had test prep classes and personal tutors to help them achieve high scores on their SATs and ACTs?
• Do you think it's reasonable to suspect that the poorer cohort would have had basic public school educations, with much less access to intensive tutoring and exam prep?
• Do you think that there's likely to be a differential in the racial profile of those two groups?

If Harvard is making entrance decisions on both exam scores AND family income, do you think that when the SAT scores alone are sliced by race, there might be an economic and educational privilege factor that gets obscured?

I have, on this board, over many posts and many years, explained how Harvard's apparent discrimination by race may not be discrimination by race. There are statistical scenarios where non-race factors may be influencing admission decisions in a way that appears, but only appears, to result in discrimination against white and Asian students.

But since Harvard itself openly admits it uses race as part of its 'holistic' admission criteria, I can hardly see why there must be so much denialism from the left about it.

 

[Metaphor]

Actually... no, we don't. There are several bills coming into consideration right now to make female genital mutilation illegal and an act of child abuse.

I had not realised the federal US law had been struck down.

Female genital mutilation in the United States - Wikipedia

It is illegal in 39 U.S. states and 'not specifically illegal' in the remainder.

Male genital mutilation is legal in all 50 US states, and legal in every country in the world, as far as I am aware. A few years ago, a country in northern Europe (I can't remember now which country exactly) almost banned it...but then it didn't.

I'll note that male genital mutilation is much rarer in Australia on a per capita basis than in America.

 

[Rhea]

So the same small corner of the world again converges as the preferred way to distract from talking about real and prevalent racism.

Look over here! Harvard admissions! See? racism doesn't exist! White privilege doesn't exist! Hah! See how I changed the subject? High fives all around.



The number of people trying to go to Harvard can be subtracted from the equation and the problem is still clear.