Bake sale.

[Sue U]

Two students of equal ability apply, the rich black kid gets in, the poor white kid gets kicked out. Thus defeating your objective surely?

If race were the only criterion assessed, that could in theory occur. But it's not.* Yet even if it were the result, that might not in itself be a bad thing, rich black kids being much more a rarity than poor white ones.

All standardized tests these days are deveoped and scrutinized to minimize various biases, yet they still creep in -- sometimes, as Scooter points out, in ways unrelated to the test itself but to the students' ability (financial and otherwise) to prepare for the test.


* Socio-economic background regardless of race is also considered, as is the high school from which the student graduated, as is whether other kids from that high school have also been admitted, and as are the extra-curricular activities and "personal essays" of the individual students.

[Sean]

How about this? Each candidate for a university place is assessed in multiple ways: exam, essay, scholastic report etc. The assessment is conducted totally blind. The assessor has no knowledge of the candidate's ethnicity or background. The candidate would be made acutely aware that attempts to gain an advantage by revealing his ethnicity, socio-economic background etc would result in immediate disqualification. University places should be decided on merit alone.

I had a student once in the UK who was denied entry to his university of choice because of his colour (he was white). A friend of mine who was a governor at that university told me that there were still places available but that they were reserved for minority students. If these places were not filled by appropriately hued students (and they were not expected to be) then they would remain empty and bollocks to the white kids.

Equality my arse! That is fucked up by anyone's standards!

[Liberty1]

Giving additional points for somthing as irrelevant as skin color is an insult to that race.

[Gob]

Two students of equal ability apply, the rich black kid gets in, the poor white kid gets kicked out. Thus defeating your objective surely?

If race were the only criterion assessed, that could in theory occur. But it's not.* Yet even if it were the result, that might not in itself be a bad thing, rich black kids being much more a rarity than poor white ones.

I disagree. Any discrimination, even against whites, is a bad thing.

[Sue U]

How about this? Each candidate for a university place is assessed in multiple ways: exam, essay, scholastic report etc.

That's already the system, plus extra-curricular activities, community service, recommendations from teachers, mentors and employers, etc.

The assessment is conducted totally blind. The assessor has no knowledge of the candidate's ethnicity or background. The candidate would be made acutely aware that attempts to gain an advantage by revealing his ethnicity, socio-economic background etc would result in immediate disqualification.

That is simply not realistic: a candidate's life apart from test scores is often replete with indications of ethnicity and socioeconomic background; many academic, social and community service organizations are run by or oriented to specific ethnic and economic groups. Why prohibit a candidate from indicating that s/he took advanced courses at the Japanese Language School or that s/he performed community service through a Jewish youth group or that s/he volunteers at the Sons of Italy or sings in the choir at the AME church? Moreover, an admissions officer can't get a complete picture of a candidate and how s/he might fit in their school based on test scores alone.

University places should be decided on merit alone.

That's fine, but what is merit? Is it test scores alone? How about overcoming the disadvantages of poverty and an inadequate school system and English as a second language? How about musical, artistic or athletic talent? How about working to help support your family? How about caring for family members disabled by illness or abandoned by their parents? There hundreds of ways to be meritorious without scoring the highest on some standardized test.

When I hire someone for my office, I don't look to skills and knowledge alone. Other charactristics are sometimes more important -- the ability to get along with other staff, for example, and the ability to communicate well with clients. My kids' doctor went to med school in Mexico because he couldn't get into a US school, but in his practice he has been a far better pediatrician for us than others who have more stellar academic credentials.

Giving additional points for somthing as irrelevant as skin color is an insult to that race.

No one is automatically being given "bonus points" for skin color. The question is whether institutions can consider ethnic background as part of the admissions criteria, and if so, to what extent. Misstating the issue is weak argument, at best.

Any discrimination, even against whites, is a bad thing.

Making a choice between two candidates on any criteria necessarily discriminates against one of them. The question is whether the discrimination is permissible. Even at this late stage of US "race relations," it would ignore reality to say that there are no cultural differences linked strongly to ethnicity and even moreso to socio-economic class; especially where it is a toss-up between two candidates, shouldn't it be permissible to consider where they came from and what impact that might have on their academic prospects, your student population and the identity of the school?

[Gob]

Any discrimination, even against whites, is a bad thing.

Making a choice between two candidates on any criteria necessarily discriminates against one of them. The question is whether the discrimination is permissible. Even at this late stage of US "race relations," it would ignore reality to say that there are no cultural differences linked strongly to ethnicity and even moreso to socio-economic class; especially where it is a toss-up between two candidates, shouldn't it be permissible to consider where they came from and what impact that might have on their academic prospects, your student population and the identity of the school?

Nicely put, you must be a bugger at your job.

However, either we are talking about the rare circumstance when two candidates on black and one white, are so evenly matched that they cannot be judged better/not better against each other, so ethnicity can be used as a determining factor. Or, we are talking about a system which already has a bias towards ethnicity as a determining factor.

So far both reasons have been given for this to be necessary in university place allocation. I don’t see how either is.

[Sue U]

Nicely put, you must be a bugger at your job.

Ha, thanks! I appreciate the opportunity to come here and try to articulate views and arguments. It's good practice.

However, either we are talking about the rare circumstance when two candidates on black and one white, are so evenly matched that they cannot be judged better/not better against each other, so ethnicity can be used as a determining factor. Or, we are talking about a system which already has a bias towards ethnicity as a determining factor.

So far both reasons have been given for this to be necessary in university place allocation. I don’t see how either is.

Did you read the link in Scooter's post about the scoring system used at the University of Michigan? U of M has been more public than most about its process, largely because of recent litigation concerning its admissions policies. Click on the link and read it through (it's not that long) and see if it doesn't make some sense.

[Gob]

I agree it makes some sense, but doesn't it start from a rather biased or slanted stance that this 20 points for race is a good and worthy thing? It's a fair whack of points for, essentially nothing.

[Scooter]

It's not 20 points for race. It's up to 20 points for a range of things of which race is one. And it's not for "essentially nothing"; it's a recognition that it is one of several characteristics for which they are attempting to correct the negative bias that is attached to other selection measures.

I repeat, that grid guarantees 16 points for someone who comes from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. There are some very defensible reasons for that, but what it amounts to is a preference for applicants of Scandinavian origin who form the plurality of the residents of that region. Just because certain factors don't explicitly give preference to white applicants doesn't prevent them from having the effect of preferring white applicants in practice.