University to students: All Whites are Racist

[Paladin]

Reading only the first page of this thread I must say I am ASHAMED to be white!!!! I cannot believe how some of the post here still to this day projects racism! You want it to stop, then stop spewing all the hate against they, them, etc... Some ASSUME that all african americans feel this way which is just NOT THE TRUTH! I know many AA's and they will be the first to tell you they dont feel that way at all. I refuse to get into this discussion because as I said before it makes me EMBARASSED to be in the same race as some here spewing their hate!!

Now on the topic of this thread if it is proven true, which I cant even see as I dont want to read posters racist comments, then YES it is wrong.

ETA THIS is what makes me ashamed to be white.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1769440&postcount=16

Yeah, but this is just a typical nonsense post by reb. Everyone knows not to take him/her too seriously as evidenced by the "wall o' text", complete with misspellings and run-on sentences. :crazy:

 

[Details]

We are on two different pages. I was talking about med school, and it IS race and gender calculated VERY carefully!!! I don't think going into college as a freshman is that calculated...but I might be wrong.

Depends on the college - but there's always a cutoff bar somewhere, between the students who make it and the rejects. And an AP course where your grade counted for extra can be the difference, and is something a student from an impoverished area doesn't have access to.

 

[Indy Gal]

Yeah, but this is just a typical nonsense post by reb. Everyone knows not to take him/her too seriously as evidenced by the "wall o' text", complete with misspellings and run-on sentences. :crazy:

I just dont understand how they are allowed to say things like that. AND this one is a good one if that makes sense. I pointed out to this poster I would love to hear them out but cant due to how they write. Thank you for making me not feel like an azz. I thought it was just me.

 

[eve]

A university's choice is almost never between a white student with a 4.0 GPA and a black student with a 1.5 GPA. At the best schools (including the ones where I studied and taught), almost all serious applicants have 4.0 GPAs or thereabouts. If race is considered, it's usually in a choice between a white applicant with a 4.15 GPA and a minority applicant with a 4.02 or the like.

Of course, I'm not saying the applicants with the highest GPAs and highest SAT scores are ALWAYS white. We're speaking in general and of groups of applicants.

And it is absolutely true that students from wealthy suburbs (mostly white) are able to take numerous AP and Honors courses that boost the GPA. (Extra GPA points are given for those classes; i.e., an A counts as more than an A.) Most inner-city schools can't afford to offer AP classes, or can't offer nearly as many. The result is systematic discrimination in favor of suburban students (mostly white) and against inner-city kids (mostly minority).

This isn't racism as in old men in smoky rooms talking about "keeping the blacks down," but it is sometimes just as effective in denying minorities access to certain advantages and opportunities. Colleges who consider race of applicants are trying to balance the process a bit.

You make good points about AP classes but don't forget how much harder they are. It is appropriate that they should be more heavily weighted. My kids take them not just to boost their GPAs but to really prepare themselves for college work. I understand that you are referring to opportunity, Nova.

But there is a little more to it, too. Being a minority can be a real advantage and the kids all know it. It is well-known among college applicants that having some ethnic/racial diversity to report will help you get in. My son joked, "Mom, c'mon isn't there something in our family tree to help me?" It's no secret. Also, girls have a tougher time getting in than boys, did you know that? They are trying to balance the genders too, and girls have higher tests and grades out of high school as a rule. They don't want the gender balance to be off, so boys can get in with lower criteria than girls.

Eve

 

[blue_the_puppy]

a question for all of you against race-based affirmative action who think grades and experience should be the only things colleges look at:

what do you think about legacy admissions? my alma mater used a point-based systems for admissions, and you got as many (if not more) points for having a parent or other relative who graduated from the school than you did if you were from an underrepresented minority group.

i never heard anybody complain about that.

 

[Nova]

You make good points about AP classes but don't forget how much harder they are. It is appropriate that they should be more heavily weighted. My kids take them not just to boost their GPAs but to really prepare themselves for college work. I understand that you are referring to opportunity, Nova.

But there is a little more to it, too. Being a minority can be a real advantage and the kids all know it. It is well-known among college applicants that having some ethnic/racial diversity to report will help you get in. My son joked, "Mom, c'mon isn't there something in our family tree to help me?" It's no secret. Also, girls have a tougher time getting in than boys, did you know that? They are trying to balance the genders too, and girls have higher tests and grades out of high school as a rule. They don't want the gender balance to be off, so boys can get in with lower criteria than girls.

Eve

I'm not against AP courses (certainly not!) or weighing them more highly. I was just pointing out how so-called "objective" criteria alone don't necessarily provide equal opportunity or even a reliable prediction of future success.

The fact that racial advantage is "common knowledge" among applicants doesn't necessarily mean much, except that the media are very good at oversimplifying the admissions process. Racial preference is always discussed in isolation, as if the rest of the admissions process were perfectly objective. But I worked in admissions at an Ivy League university and I promise you some kids got in because they charmed the Dean. Others attracted notice because they had an unusually compelling personal history with some sort of tragedy that made them interesting or sympathetic.

The perception given by the media is that everything is perfectly fair except for this one area. But in fact, racial preference is only one of countless things that might give an applicant a leg up.

And, as a rule, we're only talking about border-line applicants anyway. The best applicants of every race go where they want. And a white applicant who loses out to a minority candidate goes to his or her second choice. But the media treats the issue as if that were the only unfairness in the universe.

 

[Nova]

It may not be a sole qualifier, but it's definitely a major one, especially where affirmative action is concerned.

I went to a school that was considered to be one of the more difficult ones in the state to gain admission (not trying to toot my own horn here). Towards the end of my undergrad years all of the students and parents received letters saying that admissions would be even harder because they were aiming to make future classes more diverse. They pretty much spelled it out for everyone and that was that people of non-white descent would be given preferential treatment when it came to admission.

Do you consider this an appropriate step towards leveling the playing field or as some would say, racial equality? How can this be when the scales are seemingly tipped a little too far in the other direction when maybe the best way is to make sure they are even?

Or is it your contention that more preference needs to be given to non-white races in order to truly make it even?

And why aren't people allowed to resent this movement without being labeled as whiners? Who are these few people making the decisions for so many?

I consider the letter you received suspiciously incendiary, don't you? Without a lot more information, I can't possibly evaluate whether the racial preferences instituted at that time were reasonable.

No, I'm not saying we need more racial preferences. Or less. I'm saying let's at least discuss the issue with a full understanding of the context. And not as if white candidates are being reduced to a life of poverty, when most of the time the only consequence is going to a second-choice school.

I don't know that anybody here has been labeled a whiner. But when that does occur, it's because white people insist on discussing racial preference as if it's the only "unfair" thing that ever happened to anybody.

 

[IrishMist]

Diverse has many meanings - it also can mean, from a wider spectrum of backgrounds - impoverished as well as wealthy. Class and race are quite closely realted often.

Also - is it giving preference to minority races, or is it taking away an existing, unspoken preference to white students (even if that preference is expressed through legacy admissions, money, preferences for activities on an application that are difficult or impossible in an impoverished, ghetto neighborhood)? Sometimes, what is called reverse racism (not that you are saying that, and not that there isn't also a very real thing that is reverse racism), is merely a group feeling discriminated against because their taken for granted privileges and preferences are going away.

Excellent post, Details. I think this is the case more often than not.

 

[Details]

a question for all of you against race-based affirmative action who think grades and experience should be the only things colleges look at:

what do you think about legacy admissions? my alma mater used a point-based systems for admissions, and you got as many (if not more) points for having a parent or other relative who graduated from the school than you did if you were from an underrepresented minority group.

i never heard anybody complain about that.

Really? I have heard plenty of people (of all colors) complain about legacies. They're wrong too, IMHO. I say the best and the brightest should be first - but some weighting is needed if you had to deal with a more difficult life than others. And that applies to a white person or a black person or anyone else raised in an impoverished, criminal, lousy neighborhood.

 

[Nova]

Really? I have heard plenty of people (of all colors) complain about legacies. They're wrong too, IMHO. I say the best and the brightest should be first - but some weighting is needed if you had to deal with a more difficult life than others. And that applies to a white person or a black person or anyone else raised in an impoverished, criminal, lousy neighborhood.

I don't like legacy admissions either, but in the case of private schools (and a lot of our best universities are private), I know they depend heavily on donations from alumni. Often those donations are tied to an understanding that the children of alumni will get in.

Not fair, but maybe a fact of life.

 

[blue_the_puppy]

fyi, looks like the school has suspended the program:

http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/nov/letter110107.html

 

[Paladin]

fyi, looks like the school has suspended the program:

http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/nov/letter110107.html

Good, the whole thing seemed cultish and brainwashish (not a word, hehe) to me.

 

[blue_the_puppy]

brainwashish

LOL!!!! ill remember that word

 

[gman20001969]

It's called Reader's Digest.

LOL!

Hey now, my old man was subscribed to reader's digest...

 

[gman20001969]

I just don't see the need for this. I went to a liberal arts college and had no problems with people of other races. I even ended up living with a black person and we became good friends. My sophomore year, I lived in a hall with all Asian students and we got along beautifully. Are they saying that college-aged kids aren't smart enough to handle working things out themselves?

I can see this being a useful tool if a student has been caught being intolerant and this is part of their punishment, but to make this a part of the residential life on campus at a public school is a bit overboard.

From what I understand (and have read from student blogs), even if you opt not to open up to their questions they will reward you with MORE one-on-one meetings to try and make you see things their way. That's WRONG. This also opens the door for making people feel guilty for their religious beliefs.

I agree. This falls in the PFS cabinet (PFS - Pretty F***ing Stupid). All this does is proves some don't think others can't think for themselves.

 

[Nova]

I agree. This falls in the PFS cabinet (PFS - Pretty F***ing Stupid). All this does is proves some don't think others can't think for themselves.

And sometimes well-intended people make mistakes.

 

[Nova]

Good, the whole thing seemed cultish and brainwashish (not a word, hehe) to me.

I'm still not sure what they were actually doing, but we agree that "all whites are racist" isn't a productive way to teach about inherent group privileges.

Certainly seems to me that a broad review is in oder.

 

[GlitchWizard]

I'm still not sure what they were actually doing, but we agree that "all whites are racist" isn't a productive way to teach about inherent group privileges.

Certainly seems to me that a broad review is in oder.

Then it will be a sexist issue, not a racist one!

 

[Paladin]

I'm still not sure what they were actually doing, but we agree that "all whites are racist" isn't a productive way to teach about inherent group privileges.

Certainly seems to me that a broad review is in oder.

Again, I'm making an assumption, but it seems to me they were sitting people down and saying "Look, this is what we believe as an institution, and if you plan on getting along here then this is what you should believe as well."

My only wish is that we had some people who actually attend(ed) the school so we can ask them what their experiences were like.

 

[Nova]

Again, I'm making an assumption, but it seems to me they were sitting people down and saying "Look, this is what we believe as an institution, and if you plan on getting along here then this is what you should believe as well."

To the extent the issue is tolerance and respect for diversity, I wouldn't have a problem with that. Yes, people have a right to think blacks are stupid and gays are evil, etc., but a university administration and faculty doesn't have to pretend those views are noble or reasonable (or even rational).

All universities express beliefs to students. "Learning is good" is a belief and few people argue an administration's right to ask that students agree.

But some of material we saw, if it is at all representative, seemed to insist that students subscribe to ideas that should be open to question and seemed to wage war against language itself.

My only wish is that we had some people who actually attend(ed) the school so we can ask them what their experiences were like.

Why spoil our debate with facts? Are you some sort of radical?