We didn't grow out of it. </strong><hr></blockquote>
But your state did. According to the article you quoted anyway. Funding for poor elementary schools was cited as one of the foundations for the success of the current program. That foundation doesn't exist everywhere.
That's how, if this plan is successful in the long run, California's been about to grow out of AA.
Is this graph describing a 4-year setback or a return to a previous all time high (4 years later)?
[code]
/
/\\ /
/ \\/
/
/
</pre><hr></blockquote>
Are you seriously arguing that Bush is bringing this issue up because he is worried that black students are being placed out of their depth, and flunking college and that it is an issue that is important to the core constituancy of the Republican voting public?
edit: tricky diagram (we need a preview button & posts that don't get randomly destroyed).
But your state did. According to the article you quoted anyway. Funding for poor elementary schools was cited as one of the foundations for the success of the current program. That foundation doesn't exist everywhere.
That's how, if this plan is successful in the long run, California's been about to grow out of AA.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I were guessing he would have to be talking about class-size reduction. That is the only program I can think of off-hand that cost hundreds of millions to implement. It was done statewide and was not exclusive to poorly performing schools.
I did experience one of the outreach programs. It was done through USC and dealt with the surrounding schools USC. (USC while being a rich private school is in a profoundly poor part of Los Angeles. They had a program you had to enroll into that provided tutoring and assistance and things of that nature. If you kept up a certain GPA and had good citizenship throughout your school career, you were allowed to attend USC for free. They didn't base it on race though the schools they were applying it within happened to be about 80% hispanic, 18% black and 2% other.
As for outreach programs, I am all for them both for the children and the parents. I consider them nothing more than a sales job for getting a college education.
Are you seriously arguing that Bush is bringing this issue up because he is worried that black students are being placed out of their depth, and flunking college and that it is an issue that is important to the core constituancy of the Republican voting public?
edit: tricky diagram (we need a preview button & posts that don't get randomly destroyed).
Well that particular graph could show lots of things. It would likely show the the number of students applying and attending the university.
However if it showed the percentage of applications accepted it would be a straight line.
This is from the article I posted.
[quote] Also, the number of underrepresented minorities who end up actually enrolling has risen over the past few years, according to university officials.
The Board of Regents approved a measure in 1995 to stop using race and gender in admissions by fall 1998. California voters in 1996 approved Proposition 209, which banned affirmative action statewide.
University officials said they think initial anger has subsided over the measures, which contributed to a decrease in minority enrollment. <hr></blockquote>
As I previously mentioned these folks who are "community leaders" told students who had been admitted not to enroll in that particular school so that the enrollment numbers would decline and they could declare they were racist. The same thing has happened in Texas where this has been implemented. However it has not happened in Florida where Jeb Bush did away with AA. This could be (pure speculation mind you) because Cubans are typically very conservative.
So just so we are clear admitted doesn't equal enrolled. The university could admit the student but the student could elect to enroll elsewhere.
What California has done is insure that not only do they receive many applications, it insures that those applications are reviewed in a color blind manner and that the students also elect to attend those schools. In terms of racial progress this actually sounds profoundly hard to do but it happened within 5 years.
However if it showed the percentage of applications accepted it would be a straight line.
[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
According to your article admissions dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels, enrollments (the article is vague here) dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels. Both despite hundreds of millions being spent on outreach to the poorer areas (which could easily have happened without the removal of AA).
Is this a success story?
So what do you mean by applications accepted and why did it remain level when everything else dipped?
If I were guessing he would have to be talking about class-size reduction. </strong><hr></blockquote>
But until this is implemented nationwide, there will be a need for AA, or other programs to help those already in the channel. AA should ultimately disappear, and that's what everyone believes. Only some think it should have been yesterday while others see the end somewhere down the line.
A replacement needs to be put in place along with whatever programs will help the new students.
No one is willing to come up with another plan, but the courts have already ruled that SOME plan is mandatory. So, until something better comes along, AA is where's it at. "Fixing public schools" is a long term project and it hasn't happened yet. And when it does it must be done in conjunction with whatever AA-like program is in place.
The only real solution to having everyone feel that they are socially equal is to have them be financially equal.
People have used the same line that has been used for thousands of years in class warfare... "You got rich off our sweat and blood". Well duh, thats why we teach Darwin's Natural Selection in schools.
But now some racist groups say that equal isn't good enough and that they should be compensated for being the lower class. How stupid is that.
Now of coarse there is racism everywhere and it should not be tolerated, ever. But we also should not mix racism into every argument just to inflame passions.
Be sure to check out the letters page.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, cute. Even cooler when it happens in real life.
Sorry if it flies in the face of what you've imagined...
And it is most certainly a "dig at someone": namely, me. At least have the grace and guts to admit it, otherwise you're just being a pussy on a message board.
Teh best argument evar!1!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Didn't think it was an "argument". It means I say what I say because I've heard it from friends (black and otherwise), so it's not just "pscates pulling shit out of thin air and being 'racist'".
It has nothing to do with "having black friends". Did I bring that up or crow about it like it was some badge of honor or made me special?
Uh...no.
But when I have friends and they happen to be black and they happen to feel as though we're close enough to talk about all this stuff and share stories and question each other's perceptions about "how things are" and so forth, I'm not allowed to relay that here? It doesn't fly? It doesn't count?
I just leave that part out so I don't risk getting dinged by others with their own little axes to grind?
No, again.
I never said or came across like "having black friends" made me special, cool or was an argument for anything. You - and others - make that leap, not me.
Again, if some here need to make stupid-ass comments and link to little websites (no digs, of course...), that says more about you and how you see things.
If the above was in reference to me, don't be a smartass and don't stir up stuff you don't know the real story behind. Everything I said above is true. Not my fault it doesn't jibe with your assumptions.
I know some of you to imagine me with a hood in my closet and a big Confederate flag hanging over my bed. It just pisses you off (and you can't reconcile it with what you THINK you know and have figured out about the world) that it all couldn't be further from the truth and real life.
It would shock some of you goons to know some other things about me, but I'd probably catch grief over that too because it would dent your little mental images and you'd have to pull up some other lame comments and links to counteract it.
Way to keep an open mind. Considering the circumstances, I kinda expected more.
Yes, just more examples of white college kids apparently knowing more than anyone else around (and instructing us all on what's what) here and throwing big smartypants statements around that have nothing to do with anything, just to stir the air a bit.
Getting to be par for the course...
Funny...I only get that here. From ONE type of person. Odd...
That's why it rolls off my back a little more than it used to.
After I put it into context (and consider the source and all), it starts to make wickedly delicious sense.
Some overzealous, never-hung-around-anyone-else-but-other-white-people dimwit who, in the interest of appearing "tolerant" and embracing diversity, sees potential racism everywhere he looks and likes to call it out to earn points I suppose (in case anyone is keeping score?).
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you think we as a society have gone too far for minorties?
Yes, just more examples of white college kids apparently knowing more than anyone else around (and instructing us all on what's what) here and throwing big smartypants statements around that have nothing to do with anything, just to stir the air a bit. </strong><hr></blockquote>
And you claim OTHER people are passing judgement without knowing all of the facts?
Someone can make racist statements without being racist just as someone who is racist can make non-racist statements. Having black friends doesn't mean you're not a racists just as not having any black friends doesn't mean you're a racist.
I just leave that part out so I don't risk getting dinged by others with their own little axes to grind?
don't be a smartass
It would shock some of you goons to know some other things about me, but I'd probably catch grief over that too because it would dent your little mental images and you'd have to pull up some other lame comments
Way to keep an open mind.
Yes, just more examples of white college kids apparently knowing more than anyone else around (and instructing us all on what's what) here and throwing big smartypants statements around that have nothing to do with anything, just to stir the air a bit.
God, I wish I knew everything...sigh.
you really don't know a goddamn thing about it
Some overzealous, never-hung-around-anyone-else-but-other-white-people dimwit who, in the interest of appearing "tolerant" and embracing diversity, sees potential racism everywhere he looks and likes to call it out to earn points
you idiotically classify as a "racist diatribe"
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow. I think the only one "digging" at people is you. The rest of are just trying to say that certain things may be deemed racist.
According to your article admissions dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels, enrollments (the article is vague here) dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels. Both despite hundreds of millions being spent on outreach to the poorer areas (which could easily have happened without the removal of AA).
Is this a success story?
So what do you mean by applications accepted and why did it remain level when everything else dipped?</strong><hr></blockquote>
What I said is that I believe they are attributing monies that were spent statewide on all schools (class-size reduction) and declaring that they were used for minority improvement efforts. Since literally everyone is a minority in California I suppose this could be called minority outreach. However that would be a bit of a stretch. (more than a bit actually)
We had statewide class-size reduction. It wasn't limited to poor schools, minority neighborhoods or anything of that nature. The richest, whitest kids in the whole state had their class teacher/student ratios reduced in k-3 and 9th grade.
As for the application thing I will use some numbers to illustrate what I am speaking about. The numbers will be smaller to easily illustrate the point.
Suppose 100 minority students applied 5 years ago and because their own actions and also affirmative actions, 50 of the students were accepted and 40 decided to attend UC schools.
Now prop 209 passes and there are plenty of upset people in the minority community. Leaders speak with them and tell them not to attend those schools even if they are accepted because they are racist. Additionally some other students likely believe they won't be able to get in without AA so they simply don't apply.
So now we have 75 students apply and 50 of them are accepted however only 30 decide to attend UC schools.
You have the same number of accepted applications, but fewer apply and fewer attended. Those would show as drops.
Now we are five years down the line and the population has grown significantly (as it always does in CA) It hasn't doubled but we will double the numbers to make it easy to follow.
So now you have 200 applications. Of those applications 100 are accepted and 79 decide to attend UC schools.
So you can see that there are percentages for 3 variables, applications sent, applications accepted and if the student actually decides to attend. It is really quite hard to control two of those. UC schools cannot force students to apply there nor can they force them to go there even when accepted. However despite not being able to control two out of three variables they still managed to create efforts that increased all three numeretically and also matched levels percentage-wise to pre AA efforts.
So yes I do call that a success story, if you don't you are welcome to type what you consider a success story to be.
But until this is implemented nationwide, there will be a need for AA, or other programs to help those already in the channel. AA should ultimately disappear, and that's what everyone believes. Only some think it should have been yesterday while others see the end somewhere down the line.
A replacement needs to be put in place along with whatever programs will help the new students.
No one is willing to come up with another plan, but the courts have already ruled that SOME plan is mandatory. So, until something better comes along, AA is where's it at. "Fixing public schools" is a long term project and it hasn't happened yet. And when it does it must be done in conjunction with whatever AA-like program is in place.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I already stated the measures we use here. Would you be willing to replace AA with these measures if they were implemented nationwide?
First have a measure in the application that gives some credit for economic neediness versus just being a race. If minorities are disportionately poor than this will disportionately help them. However you aren't calling it race. It is based on income and need.
Secondly have the top 4-5% of every high school be guaranteed admission to the state school system. If a school is 90+ minority then the top 4-5% are pretty much guaranteed to be as well.
Finally have outreaches to schools that offer fewer AP classes and have a lower percentage of students attending college. (Again this would likely disportionaly help minorities without making it a racial issue)
If these three measures were used could you live with them instead of AA?
If these three measures were used could you live with them instead of AA? </strong><hr></blockquote>
I still think this covers us in 15 years, but not immediately. 4-5%? That's a tough cutoff simply because there are people in the channel now that have had limited resources available to the to help them reach that 4-5% threshold.
Outreach is a great idea, but it's too late to help the current generation and the true positive effects of it won't be felt for years to come.
Economic neediness is crucial. That's more important to me than race.
Overall I think this is a good foundation. I'd like to see the country after 20 years of this in place everywhere, but personally I still wouldn't be happy with the status quo.
If plans like these aren't implemented, the 'current generation' will always be marginalized. That's why I've advocated for a two system solution. Kill the source of the problem and help those born out of the unfortunate circumstances prior to our fixing the source problems.
I still think this covers us in 15 years, but not immediately. 4-5%? That's a tough cutoff simply because there are people in the channel now that have had limited resources available to the to help them reach that 4-5% threshold.
Outreach is a great idea, but it's too late to help the current generation and the true positive effects of it won't be felt for years to come.
Economic neediness is crucial. That's more important to me than race.
Overall I think this is a good foundation. I'd like to see the country after 20 years of this in place everywhere, but personally I still wouldn't be happy with the status quo.
If plans like these aren't implemented, the 'current generation' will always be marginalized. That's why I've advocated for a two system solution. Kill the source of the problem and help those born out of the unfortunate circumstances prior to our fixing the source problems.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you dramtically overstate the problem and the timeframe while dramatically understating the opportunities available.
How is not going to a top 1% school marginalizing someone? I must be marginalized because even I didn't go to a university like that.
You speak of losing a generation and the percentages were comparable system-wide within 5 years.
Also understand that again that the UC system is the highest tier in the state. The second tier system CSU profoundly diverse.
"The CSU is the most diverse university system in the nation, with minority enrollment topping 53 percent, more than twice the national average for four-year public universities," said CSU Chancellor Charles B. Reed
Lastly most states have a community college system of some sort where the only requirement towards taking classes is being over 18. I didn't look up the statistics but I would be willing to bet the enrollment there is a minimum of 53% minority.
Also we are only talking about freshman admissions as well. Statistical trends show huge growth for minority students as junior transfers into even the top-tier schools.
The current generation will not be marginalized. There are more opportunities than ever for them and they will dynamically find them and achieve with them more than any previous generation.
In many ways this thinking, reflects a very subtle type of racism. If a white person did not get into a top 1% college I doubt we would be questioning their resolve. Likewise I doubt they would be marginalized for the rest of their lives or that current generation.
Comments
<strong>
We didn't grow out of it. </strong><hr></blockquote>
But your state did. According to the article you quoted anyway. Funding for poor elementary schools was cited as one of the foundations for the success of the current program. That foundation doesn't exist everywhere.
That's how, if this plan is successful in the long run, California's been about to grow out of AA.
Is this graph describing a 4-year setback or a return to a previous all time high (4 years later)?
[code]
/
/\\ /
/ \\/
/
/
</pre><hr></blockquote>
Are you seriously arguing that Bush is bringing this issue up because he is worried that black students are being placed out of their depth, and flunking college and that it is an issue that is important to the core constituancy of the Republican voting public?
edit: tricky diagram (we need a preview button & posts that don't get randomly destroyed).
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: stupider...likeafox ]</p>
<strong>
But your state did. According to the article you quoted anyway. Funding for poor elementary schools was cited as one of the foundations for the success of the current program. That foundation doesn't exist everywhere.
That's how, if this plan is successful in the long run, California's been about to grow out of AA.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I were guessing he would have to be talking about class-size reduction. That is the only program I can think of off-hand that cost hundreds of millions to implement. It was done statewide and was not exclusive to poorly performing schools.
I did experience one of the outreach programs. It was done through USC and dealt with the surrounding schools USC. (USC while being a rich private school is in a profoundly poor part of Los Angeles. They had a program you had to enroll into that provided tutoring and assistance and things of that nature. If you kept up a certain GPA and had good citizenship throughout your school career, you were allowed to attend USC for free. They didn't base it on race though the schools they were applying it within happened to be about 80% hispanic, 18% black and 2% other.
As for outreach programs, I am all for them both for the children and the parents. I consider them nothing more than a sales job for getting a college education.
Nick
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: stupider...likeafox ]</p>
/
/\\ /
/ \\/
/
/
</pre><hr></blockquote>
Are you seriously arguing that Bush is bringing this issue up because he is worried that black students are being placed out of their depth, and flunking college and that it is an issue that is important to the core constituancy of the Republican voting public?
edit: tricky diagram (we need a preview button & posts that don't get randomly destroyed).
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: stupider...likeafox ][/qb]<hr></blockquote>
Well that particular graph could show lots of things. It would likely show the the number of students applying and attending the university.
However if it showed the percentage of applications accepted it would be a straight line.
This is from the article I posted.
[quote] Also, the number of underrepresented minorities who end up actually enrolling has risen over the past few years, according to university officials.
The Board of Regents approved a measure in 1995 to stop using race and gender in admissions by fall 1998. California voters in 1996 approved Proposition 209, which banned affirmative action statewide.
University officials said they think initial anger has subsided over the measures, which contributed to a decrease in minority enrollment. <hr></blockquote>
As I previously mentioned these folks who are "community leaders" told students who had been admitted not to enroll in that particular school so that the enrollment numbers would decline and they could declare they were racist. The same thing has happened in Texas where this has been implemented. However it has not happened in Florida where Jeb Bush did away with AA. This could be (pure speculation mind you) because Cubans are typically very conservative.
So just so we are clear admitted doesn't equal enrolled. The university could admit the student but the student could elect to enroll elsewhere.
What California has done is insure that not only do they receive many applications, it insures that those applications are reviewed in a color blind manner and that the students also elect to attend those schools. In terms of racial progress this actually sounds profoundly hard to do but it happened within 5 years.
Nick
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: trumptman ]</p>
However if it showed the percentage of applications accepted it would be a straight line.
[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
According to your article admissions dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels, enrollments (the article is vague here) dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels. Both despite hundreds of millions being spent on outreach to the poorer areas (which could easily have happened without the removal of AA).
Is this a success story?
So what do you mean by applications accepted and why did it remain level when everything else dipped?
<strong>
If I were guessing he would have to be talking about class-size reduction. </strong><hr></blockquote>
But until this is implemented nationwide, there will be a need for AA, or other programs to help those already in the channel. AA should ultimately disappear, and that's what everyone believes. Only some think it should have been yesterday while others see the end somewhere down the line.
A replacement needs to be put in place along with whatever programs will help the new students.
No one is willing to come up with another plan, but the courts have already ruled that SOME plan is mandatory. So, until something better comes along, AA is where's it at. "Fixing public schools" is a long term project and it hasn't happened yet. And when it does it must be done in conjunction with whatever AA-like program is in place.
The only real solution to having everyone feel that they are socially equal is to have them be financially equal.
People have used the same line that has been used for thousands of years in class warfare... "You got rich off our sweat and blood". Well duh, thats why we teach Darwin's Natural Selection in schools.
But now some racist groups say that equal isn't good enough and that they should be compensated for being the lower class.
Now of coarse there is racism everywhere and it should not be tolerated, ever. But we also should not mix racism into every argument just to inflame passions.
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: MrBillData ]</p>
<strong>I was reminded of this site by some earlier discussion. (note this is not intended as a dig at anyone)
<a href="http://www.blackpeopleloveus.com/"; target="_blank">http://www.blackpeopleloveus.com/</a>;
Be sure to check out the letters page.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, cute. Even cooler when it happens in real life.
Sorry if it flies in the face of what you've imagined...
And it is most certainly a "dig at someone": namely, me. At least have the grace and guts to admit it, otherwise you're just being a pussy on a message board.
Therefore, fück off.
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
<strong>"But I have black friends."
Teh best argument evar!1!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Didn't think it was an "argument". It means I say what I say because I've heard it from friends (black and otherwise), so it's not just "pscates pulling shit out of thin air and being 'racist'".
It has nothing to do with "having black friends". Did I bring that up or crow about it like it was some badge of honor or made me special?
Uh...no.
But when I have friends and they happen to be black and they happen to feel as though we're close enough to talk about all this stuff and share stories and question each other's perceptions about "how things are" and so forth, I'm not allowed to relay that here? It doesn't fly? It doesn't count?
I just leave that part out so I don't risk getting dinged by others with their own little axes to grind?
No, again.
I never said or came across like "having black friends" made me special, cool or was an argument for anything. You - and others - make that leap, not me.
Again, if some here need to make stupid-ass comments and link to little websites (no digs, of course...), that says more about you and how you see things.
If the above was in reference to me, don't be a smartass and don't stir up stuff you don't know the real story behind. Everything I said above is true. Not my fault it doesn't jibe with your assumptions.
I know some of you to imagine me with a hood in my closet and a big Confederate flag hanging over my bed. It just pisses you off (and you can't reconcile it with what you THINK you know and have figured out about the world) that it all couldn't be further from the truth and real life.
It would shock some of you goons to know some other things about me, but I'd probably catch grief over that too because it would dent your little mental images and you'd have to pull up some other lame comments and links to counteract it.
Way to keep an open mind. Considering the circumstances, I kinda expected more.
Yes, just more examples of white college kids apparently knowing more than anyone else around (and instructing us all on what's what) here and throwing big smartypants statements around that have nothing to do with anything, just to stir the air a bit.
Getting to be par for the course...
Funny...I only get that here. From ONE type of person. Odd...
That's why it rolls off my back a little more than it used to.
After I put it into context (and consider the source and all), it starts to make wickedly delicious sense.
God, I wish I knew everything...sigh.
[ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
<strong>.
Some overzealous, never-hung-around-anyone-else-but-other-white-people dimwit who, in the interest of appearing "tolerant" and embracing diversity, sees potential racism everywhere he looks and likes to call it out to earn points I suppose (in case anyone is keeping score?).
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you think we as a society have gone too far for minorties?
<strong>
Yes, just more examples of white college kids apparently knowing more than anyone else around (and instructing us all on what's what) here and throwing big smartypants statements around that have nothing to do with anything, just to stir the air a bit. </strong><hr></blockquote>
And you claim OTHER people are passing judgement without knowing all of the facts?
Someone can make racist statements without being racist just as someone who is racist can make non-racist statements. Having black friends doesn't mean you're not a racists just as not having any black friends doesn't mean you're a racist.
A racist comment is a racist comment regardless.
<strong>
And it is most certainly a "dig at someone": namely, me.
</strong>
<hr></blockquote>
I stated that it wasn't aimed at anyone when I posted it, and I'm saying it again now.
I'm at a loss as to what else I can do.
<strong>
you're just being a pussy on a message board.
Therefore, fück off.
I just leave that part out so I don't risk getting dinged by others with their own little axes to grind?
don't be a smartass
It would shock some of you goons to know some other things about me, but I'd probably catch grief over that too because it would dent your little mental images and you'd have to pull up some other lame comments
Way to keep an open mind.
Yes, just more examples of white college kids apparently knowing more than anyone else around (and instructing us all on what's what) here and throwing big smartypants statements around that have nothing to do with anything, just to stir the air a bit.
God, I wish I knew everything...sigh.
you really don't know a goddamn thing about it
Some overzealous, never-hung-around-anyone-else-but-other-white-people dimwit who, in the interest of appearing "tolerant" and embracing diversity, sees potential racism everywhere he looks and likes to call it out to earn points
you idiotically classify as a "racist diatribe"
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow. I think the only one "digging" at people is you. The rest of are just trying to say that certain things may be deemed racist.
<strong>
According to your article admissions dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels, enrollments (the article is vague here) dipped and still haven't surpassed 1997 levels. Both despite hundreds of millions being spent on outreach to the poorer areas (which could easily have happened without the removal of AA).
Is this a success story?
So what do you mean by applications accepted and why did it remain level when everything else dipped?</strong><hr></blockquote>
What I said is that I believe they are attributing monies that were spent statewide on all schools (class-size reduction) and declaring that they were used for minority improvement efforts. Since literally everyone is a minority in California I suppose this could be called minority outreach. However that would be a bit of a stretch. (more than a bit actually)
We had statewide class-size reduction. It wasn't limited to poor schools, minority neighborhoods or anything of that nature. The richest, whitest kids in the whole state had their class teacher/student ratios reduced in k-3 and 9th grade.
As for the application thing I will use some numbers to illustrate what I am speaking about. The numbers will be smaller to easily illustrate the point.
Suppose 100 minority students applied 5 years ago and because their own actions and also affirmative actions, 50 of the students were accepted and 40 decided to attend UC schools.
Now prop 209 passes and there are plenty of upset people in the minority community. Leaders speak with them and tell them not to attend those schools even if they are accepted because they are racist. Additionally some other students likely believe they won't be able to get in without AA so they simply don't apply.
So now we have 75 students apply and 50 of them are accepted however only 30 decide to attend UC schools.
You have the same number of accepted applications, but fewer apply and fewer attended. Those would show as drops.
Now we are five years down the line and the population has grown significantly (as it always does in CA) It hasn't doubled but we will double the numbers to make it easy to follow.
So now you have 200 applications. Of those applications 100 are accepted and 79 decide to attend UC schools.
So you can see that there are percentages for 3 variables, applications sent, applications accepted and if the student actually decides to attend. It is really quite hard to control two of those. UC schools cannot force students to apply there nor can they force them to go there even when accepted. However despite not being able to control two out of three variables they still managed to create efforts that increased all three numeretically and also matched levels percentage-wise to pre AA efforts.
So yes I do call that a success story, if you don't you are welcome to type what you consider a success story to be.
Nick
<strong>
But until this is implemented nationwide, there will be a need for AA, or other programs to help those already in the channel. AA should ultimately disappear, and that's what everyone believes. Only some think it should have been yesterday while others see the end somewhere down the line.
A replacement needs to be put in place along with whatever programs will help the new students.
No one is willing to come up with another plan, but the courts have already ruled that SOME plan is mandatory. So, until something better comes along, AA is where's it at. "Fixing public schools" is a long term project and it hasn't happened yet. And when it does it must be done in conjunction with whatever AA-like program is in place.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I already stated the measures we use here. Would you be willing to replace AA with these measures if they were implemented nationwide?
First have a measure in the application that gives some credit for economic neediness versus just being a race. If minorities are disportionately poor than this will disportionately help them. However you aren't calling it race. It is based on income and need.
Secondly have the top 4-5% of every high school be guaranteed admission to the state school system. If a school is 90+ minority then the top 4-5% are pretty much guaranteed to be as well.
Finally have outreaches to schools that offer fewer AP classes and have a lower percentage of students attending college. (Again this would likely disportionaly help minorities without making it a racial issue)
If these three measures were used could you live with them instead of AA?
I know I could.
Nick
<strong>
If these three measures were used could you live with them instead of AA? </strong><hr></blockquote>
I still think this covers us in 15 years, but not immediately. 4-5%? That's a tough cutoff simply because there are people in the channel now that have had limited resources available to the to help them reach that 4-5% threshold.
Outreach is a great idea, but it's too late to help the current generation and the true positive effects of it won't be felt for years to come.
Economic neediness is crucial. That's more important to me than race.
Overall I think this is a good foundation. I'd like to see the country after 20 years of this in place everywhere, but personally I still wouldn't be happy with the status quo.
If plans like these aren't implemented, the 'current generation' will always be marginalized. That's why I've advocated for a two system solution. Kill the source of the problem and help those born out of the unfortunate circumstances prior to our fixing the source problems.
<strong>
I still think this covers us in 15 years, but not immediately. 4-5%? That's a tough cutoff simply because there are people in the channel now that have had limited resources available to the to help them reach that 4-5% threshold.
Outreach is a great idea, but it's too late to help the current generation and the true positive effects of it won't be felt for years to come.
Economic neediness is crucial. That's more important to me than race.
Overall I think this is a good foundation. I'd like to see the country after 20 years of this in place everywhere, but personally I still wouldn't be happy with the status quo.
If plans like these aren't implemented, the 'current generation' will always be marginalized. That's why I've advocated for a two system solution. Kill the source of the problem and help those born out of the unfortunate circumstances prior to our fixing the source problems.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you dramtically overstate the problem and the timeframe while dramatically understating the opportunities available.
How is not going to a top 1% school marginalizing someone? I must be marginalized because even I didn't go to a university like that.
You speak of losing a generation and the percentages were comparable system-wide within 5 years.
Also understand that again that the UC system is the highest tier in the state. The second tier system CSU profoundly diverse.
"The CSU is the most diverse university system in the nation, with minority enrollment topping 53 percent, more than twice the national average for four-year public universities," said CSU Chancellor Charles B. Reed
Lastly most states have a community college system of some sort where the only requirement towards taking classes is being over 18. I didn't look up the statistics but I would be willing to bet the enrollment there is a minimum of 53% minority.
Also we are only talking about freshman admissions as well. Statistical trends show huge growth for minority students as junior transfers into even the top-tier schools.
The current generation will not be marginalized. There are more opportunities than ever for them and they will dynamically find them and achieve with them more than any previous generation.
In many ways this thinking, reflects a very subtle type of racism. If a white person did not get into a top 1% college I doubt we would be questioning their resolve. Likewise I doubt they would be marginalized for the rest of their lives or that current generation.
Nick