Affirmative Action on its way out?

Mr. Deez

Mr. Deez

Beer Prophet
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case against the University of Texas. See story. Race-based admissions practices held on by one vote in the previous case. The deciding vote in that case (Sandra Day O'Connor) is now gone from the Court and replaced by the more conservative Samuel Alito.
 
If the law school is forced to open up their books because of this case the affirmative action story will be a distant second to all the scandal and funny business The're going to discover. patronage, nepotisism, and political connections were the diving force in
Law school admissions during this era. Shameful, considering its a taxpayer supported institution .
 
Texas has an embarassing history on the wrong side of AA. Too bad they didnt learn their lesson the first time.
 
i hope Affirmative Action gets struck down once and for all…it is patronizing and insulting to those who had to receive it.
 
The Civil War was 150 years ago.

It's time we stopped pampering segments of the population and make them get off their butts and earn what the rest of us had to earn -- without the benefit of politically-correct. B. S. "affirmative action" practices. It's discrimination of the highest form and should be totally illegal.

And it's time to stop awarding "minorities" 10% higher scores than whites on government jobs exams. No wonder government agencies have worse employees than private industry. The bad ones are the ones hired for government jobs under today's preference system. Affirmative action is a product of warped leftist minds and a miserably failed system.

Like the rest of the "Great" Society legislation, it should be repealed. Trillions of dollars later and we still have a huge underclass. Give people a crutch and they will get lazy and stay that way.
 
If the scotus hopefully strikes down our racist admission policy, perhaps the UT administration will take it upon themselves to strike down the rest of the "special circumstances" that allows an advantage of one applicant over another applicant.
A high school student that applies to UT should not be at a disadvantage because:
SocioEconomic status of family
Single parent home
language spoken at home
Socio-economic status of school attended
average act/sat score of school attended in relation to students own act/sat score.
 
Law changed, only 75% of incoming class can be admitted under the top 10% rules. I believe 2011 admitted only top 8% under the rule. Thus allowing hard working kids with high gpas and with high act/sat scores that were in their top 9% & 10% of their high school classes to be pooled with the rest of the applicant pool and then passed over by lesser qualified applicants.
See the subjective holistic matrix used by UT admission which includes the "special circumstances" listed in previous post. Oh, and also race advantage.
Life is grand, my 1400 sat score is much better than the 650 avg sat score at my high school, so therefore I get "holistic"points to help negate the another applicant that scored 2100 on their sat.
I will probably get enough "holistic" points due to my parents divorcing, speaking another language at home, having parents that never achieved and not being white to get ahead of one of those other applicants that were in the top 9% that outscored me on my sat.
 
Michtex, my point is that A&M is trending closer to UT due to our misguided policies. The gap between the two schools could be and should be much wider.
 
Good question, but I know that UT's policies are more like "top 8%" these days, and I believe that this policy covers a much higher percentage of the total students accepted to UT as opposed to A&M.
 
The 75% enrollment cap on top 10% admission applied only to UT Austin and I believe A&M does not use race in admissions. I could be wrong about A&M not using race as this is second hand info.
In 2011 UT stopped automatic acceptance of top students at 8%, A&M had to continue to accept the top 9-10%.
 
A world of difference between giving preference based on athletic ability versus giving preference based on race. Athletics involve discipline, hard work, and merit. An individuals race is purely arbitrary.
 
A&M does not use race as a factor for admission. Consequently, there was a ruckus about this with a legislator complaining that we used legacy as a factor and that he would try to force A&M to use race, too. So, we diffused the situation by dropping legacy,also...

FWIW, with regard to the top 10% rule, one BIG change needs to happen. Rather than guarantee admission to the state school of choice, it needs to be a guarantee of admission to A school in the public state system. So, you're not necessarily guaranteed getting into UT but could get into Sam Houston. This would ease the burden on the big 2 schools and ensure that the best students get in and still make sure that those top 10% students can get a decent college education.

One problem I see with the current setup is that students that would do well as Sam Houston get into UT instead, where they're not as prepared. Then they do poorly or drop out and this hurts them in the long run. If they'd gotten into Sam Houston in the first place they'd have been much better off...
 
CNN poll today has 86% of people saying that race should not be a consideration of admission to a Public University/College.

It is a simple yes or no question, straight forward and from a left leaning media source.

I find that telling and interesting.
 
CNN poll today has 86% of people saying that race should not be a consideration of admission to a Public University/College.

It is a simple yes or no question, straight forward and from a left leaning media source, about 200,000 respondents.

I find that telling and interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top