posted on May 27, 2002 03:55:11 AM new
I have just got through reading the current state of constitutional law with regard to accepting minority students at universities.
It is very confusing.
What I get is that it is important for minorities to have a shot at better paying jobs available to lawyers and doctors because that was denied them in the past.
Makes sense to me.
However if the schools admit students based on their grades and don't exclude minorities hasn't the err
or been corrected?
No. The idea is that we have to go beyond correcting what is wrong and actually MAKE UP for past error by making more minorities into professional people. I suspect the idea is that eventually there will be as many black lawyers and doctors as if the right thing had been done in the first place. But nobody ever really says that or talks about how we will know we have attained that goal. Perhaps we will have to go a little beyond that as a sort of cultural punishment for past deeds.
However what nobody seems to have in mind at all is that there is an unspoken goal that we maintain some level of QUALITY in the doctors and lawyers we turn out.
Nobody seems to face the reality that if we admit a bunch of people to medical school who are not very bright or have not been prepared by their initial education then all the laws in the world won't make them a good doctor. They may be really good at being black - dark as can be - but it really doesn't mean that when they get out of school all the inequalities will have disappeared and they will be just as good as the wiz kids with good grades. Unless the education system is willing to admit that their grading system is basically flawed and meaningless? - No I didn't think so.
Well I suppose SOMEONE has to go to a doctor (or lawyer) who was at the bottom of his class. Most of us have the luxery of not knowing if our doctor just squeeked through.
But I have to ask - Who is going to go to these second rate doctors and lawyers who had no business being in law school or medical school in the first place?
Oh they will be failed out if they can't make the cut? You really think the schools will allow the teachers to fail out and invalidate their choices in students - reducing the size of the next class and decimating the tuition income? Foolish foolish thought. It just lowers the overall quality of the people being graduated.
One may predict that the second tier minority doctors and lawyers will mainly go forth to service the community from which they came. So in making up for past crimes we foist off on the minority community doctors who will not treat you as well as could be and lawyers who will not serve your case as well as might be.
And this is supposed to set matters right?
I can just see some older black person at a public clinic saying "I don't want no black doctor." and the hell of it will be that it would not be unthinking discrimination but simple self interest knowing chances are the doctor is second rate.
What I am trying to say is diversity is not a plus if you extend it to the dumb.
Perhaps if you somehow made sure that these people only had white clients then that would act even further to address the initial harm.
That may be a hard sell.
Don't confuse us with Asians and Hispanics. We can barely sound like it makes sense dealing with two groups and their history.
I am starting to suspect that there IS no way to correct a major social inequality within a generation or two and not cause as much harm as you correct.
posted on May 27, 2002 04:31:53 AM new"Nobody seems to face the reality that if we admit a bunch of people to medical school who are not very bright or have not been prepared by their initial education then all the laws in the world won't make them a good doctor".
That's not the way it's structured.All that happens is that in a case where there are two equally qualified applicants, one a minority and one not, the place will sometimes go to the minority member, decided on a case to case basis. The idea that the successful minority applicant is the lesser qualified is no longer valid even though when the affirmative action programs were initiated there were selectors taking lesser qualified applicants in a misguided belief that they were required to do so.
posted on May 27, 2002 05:44:22 AM new
Thanks Ken. I really thought that they would admit someone with lower, not equal grades in order to get a minority.
posted on May 27, 2002 06:14:09 AM new
Gravid, med schools don't necessarily accept the students with the highest grades. A childhood friend of mine and his college roommate applied to med school at the same time. Both are white and both were dean's list students. My friend worried because his grades were lower than his roommate's - he had a few B's. His friend was more studious while he played golf. Guess who was accepted. My friend was lead to believe that if the potential to complete the coursework was equal between two candidates, a candidate with a more diverse background and interests would have the advantage. (Ha ha! It's really the ability to play golf that gets a person into med school!)
[ edited by saabsister on May 27, 2002 06:14 AM ]
posted on May 27, 2002 06:53:04 AM new
This is an extremely upsetting topic to me. I doubt I'll go around with it. Just a couple of pre-coffee vignettes:
The Kid and I are ALONE. I work. Doesn't make me a hero. I have no fashion; no *lifestyle*. (Remembering to be mindful and think of impoverished families everywhere...)
I have a colleague. She is black. She is smart. She owns a condo; a car; a timeshare. Her kids have grandparents that shower them with clothes. She admits she uses her Blackness to get them scholarships to Manhattan's top private schools. Oh, she also has a husband, her childrens father, who she didn't bother to marry legally. Guess they'd have to give up the timeshare or something.
I wish I could get my ("superior" kid a scholarship. But I was an a-hole and kept working and didn't go on welfare, etc.
posted on May 27, 2002 10:06:11 AM new
Gravid - This law is different in each state. Krs is right....the way he shared is correct for California. But ...according to this weeks 60 Minutes program...each state has defined it their own way.
The program was about Michigan State University Law School where three students who applied for admission were not accepted even though their test scores were higher than those of some minority students. They are suing saying this is reverse discrimination. Their state is not doing the 'all things being equal...then the minority student wins'...idea. They're giving minority applicants 20 points more on their test scores to 'level the playing field'. They shared an essay is only given 1 point, and other low points are earned for other positives the students have accomplished other than their grades.
So....that's my long winded way of saying...I'd prefer to have the top grades mean the most to those admitted to our medical and law schools.
[ edited by Linda_K on May 27, 2002 10:09 AM ]
posted on May 27, 2002 09:15:52 PM new
this is a scam, Whites are a minority worldwide. I could just see how this would go over in non white countries, NOT! It's insane to continue this.
posted on May 27, 2002 11:48:52 PM new"This law is different in each state. Krs is right....the way he shared is correct for California. But ...according to this weeks 60 Minutes program...each state has defined it their own way".
No, I was not talking about CA law, affirmative action laws are federal and "each state does not define them in their own way" - they comply or they don't. A Suit against university is not necessarily a suit against a state - the student's case outlined in the very complete and unbiased authority "Sixty Minutes of Sensationalism" is against the school administrators petitioning that they be made to comply with federal mandate.
I do not "share". I don't attend recovery groups which incorporate that weird way of putting things.
posted on May 28, 2002 01:00:09 AM new
I watched the 60 Minutes segment on this subject. It showed how a white female, (age about 35) who worked nights, attending college in the day time, and had a top notch GPA was DENIED addmision to the MSU Law School while others, blacks with lesser qualifications were admitted.
If this doesn't seem so unfair, let's consider the black student who's father is a doctor or lawyer. This person has undoubtly had a much better life than the child of the average white blue collar factory worker from Detroit. Now he wants to go to MSU, and because he's black, and because his parent(s) may have gone to MSU, he will be given the key to the building.
Oh, just one more thing. Consider the fact that someday, you may be involved in a traffic accident and be transported emergency status to a hospital. Your doctor just may be a graduate of an affirmative action program.
posted on May 28, 2002 01:28:45 AM new
Yes - researching it some more there is some variation but it is by court districts. The Federal Court that has ruled here in MI covers several states in which their ruling holds. There is a map of the circuits at:
http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDCTS/
The Supreme Court has not agreed to hear a case on this topic for some time.
It seems silly to have these circuits when nobody is riding around on a horse or limited in ability to travel to a court, so there is no uniformity. Any legal eagles have a rational for leaving them this way?
posted on May 28, 2002 04:43:33 AM new
You sure sound bitter, Yeager.
What proof was offered that the qualifications of the black students were "lesser"? Also, there are several selection factors that have not entered your take on this; one judgement made very early in the selection process involves an assessment of the prospective student's probability of success through the entire future course of study. Within those such elements as financial stability, gender, or attendance regularity may be considered. A student applicant may have taken several more years than is the usual to achieve the undergraduate record presented. There may be questions as to the student's ability to pay. There may be a probability of marriage (mostly considered in cases of woman applicants sadly enough) in the selection pot. Any number of other factors may be deemed to apply and most of them may have nothing whatever to do with affirmative action, race, or even objective fairness.
In most if not all major universities it used to be and may well still be that children of alumni are given a leg up in the process regardless their race.
posted on May 28, 2002 05:33:32 AM newWhat proof was offered? Well they interviewed one black man who shared he had only a C average.
Then a MSU professor [who shared he was a liberal] showed 60 minutes the evaluation form where points are given and for what purposes.
Most points given for things like parents having attended the school...the applicants essay....etc...were very low...most under 1 - 3 points. But because one was non-white...they were given a whopping 20 points. That *is* reverse discrimination to me. The university spokesperson even shared the reason for giving these points was to promote diversity.
Many, myself included, don't believe that lowering the standards is a good enough reason to discriminate against other more qualified people.
posted on May 28, 2002 07:38:51 AM new
That does not give any sign of a lowered standard as all aplicants are qualified.
There's no difference between this and the federal practice of giving veterans a five point boost or the survivor of a dead veteran a 10 point lead as no points are awarded anyone who does not meet the minimun qualification in the first place.
posted on May 28, 2002 02:47:36 PM new
Ken you can read all the statutes you want and analyse them to death. It's much simpler just to ask somebody. According to a friend who works in admissions at Rutgers: "We KNOW who we have to take!"
posted on May 28, 2002 03:18:05 PM new
bEEN THERE MYSELF, BUT IT ISN'T TRUE - THEY don't HAVE TO TAKE - it just takes nuts not to do as they're carefully not told.
The entire thing is moot really, as the minority doctor is likely to be the better one. There's a motivation to prove that no program enabled the student - his own aptitudes did. Aside that, it doesn't make any difference because gravid's complaint over the loss of quality medical care is invalid because there's no such thing. Doctors are simply parts changers/pill passers/manual readers/salesmen - followers of trends. Their field of endeavor is too complex for any human to gain full expertize within it. Since no one can master it it doesn't matter that a lesser attempt is made; the result will still be a failure.
The case involves aa law school. How the medicos got into it is anybody's guess. Any lawyer is as good as the next pretty much, but I'd rather have a street wise fighter represent me than some namby pamby whiner on 60 minutes.
Sorry if I sound bitter to you. That is not my intention. I'm just calling it as I see it. As for you assesment of doctors being pill passers, ect., I disagree. I have undergone 2 kindey transplants in my life and I really don't think my doctors were pill passers. They made very important decisions for my health care. These were made on knowledge, ability, training and education.
Also, it may be important to note. I was once talking to a Michigan State Police Trooper. He, (a white trooper) said that black troopers only have to pass the entry exam with only 70 points, while white troopers have to get at least 90 points. So now that you have the formula of failure outlined for doctors, what is the formula for failure for state troopers???
Any lawyer is as good as the next pretty much, but I'd rather have a street wise fighter represent me than some namby pamby whiner on 60 minutes.
If you ever need a good attorney, you might want to call My Cousin Vinny. Not too bright, but really street wise. Maybe Herman Munster will be the judge!
posted on May 29, 2002 06:23:56 AM new
[i]"He, (a white trooper) said that black troopers only have to pass the entry exam
with only 70 points, while white troopers have to get at least 90 points"[/i].
And that's good enough for you, eh yeager? That WHITE trooper told you that and so it must be true; and that white trooper would never express any resentment of the fact that there ARE black troopers in that way - such bigotry could not exist in any Michigan State Trooper! Right?
posted on May 29, 2002 07:54:58 AM new
Hey gravid can you believe someone actually said something like this ?
Any lawyer is as good as the next pretty much, but I'd rather have a street wise fighter represent me than some namby pamby whiner on 60 minutes.
I hate to burst the bubble here folks but if you think that whe you give up your hard earned bucks to some schmuck that your going to get Spence or perry mason you have got a rather rude awakening coming.
The condition of our Legal disciplinary system makes Clinton look like a saint!
what you will most likely get for your money is some vicious self important malcontent who is only too happy to take your money and once he has it will not return calls and will cut just about any deal to dispose of your case.
The pimps at the Michigan bar association might discipline a lawyer if he murders a judge in the courtroom. Other wise they have gaurenteed that the majority of citizens gets joke like representation and that the poor and indigent get the worst plea bargain money can buy.
these greedy parasites nationwide have made a mockery of our laws with a sniveling ex jock savagly stalking and murdering his ex wife and a bystnader and now he searches the golf courses of America looking for the one armed man who committed the crime.
They turned the theft of 60billion from our savings and loans into a circus.
They keep a hoard of crimminal scum out on the streets so that the average citizen gives up more and more rights trying to keep their families safe.
The solution is to today make the bar association a fraternity a good ole boys club with no standing before the court. and put the jurisdiction for complaints into consumer protection jail the crooks and set standards.
if you dont do this your kid will have to have a million dollars worth of insurance to run a lemonade stand.
a lot has been said about sharks and professional courtesy actually sharks are not bottom feeders. an awful lot of lawyers are.
posted on May 29, 2002 07:57:25 AM new
Gaining entry to a professional post grad school is nearly exclusively based on entrance exams, except if you're a minotity.
For law school, that exam is the LSAT. High undergraduate grades will not help you gain entry to a competitive if your LSAT is low. Lower grades can be overcome with a very high LSAT score.
The affirmative action cases at the law schools are almost all based on admiting minorities with lower LSAT scores over white students with better grades and LSAT scores.
The LSAT, while not perfect, is the best predictor of law school performance and success.
Grades are almost impossible to use for selection due to grade inflation, and highly subjective grading at the myriad of undergraduate institutions.
A case on point is the offering of scholarships to high school validictorians from inner city minority schools. These students have perfect grade point averages, yet many can not score high enough on the ACT/SAT to even gain entry to many colleges.
What law and med schools are doing is basically exempting minority students from the standard competitive measures for entry.
This does not necessarily mean that the minority is unqualified. It means that the minority is not the best qualified under the standards commonly used to select non-minority applicants.
So what do the Supremes say ? Minority status can be a factor for admission, but not the exclusive factor, nor can they set aside a percentage of seats exclusively for minorities.
So minority status can carry some weight for admissions, but how much ?
It would seem that if a minority applicant is accepted with metrics that are well below non-minorities that are rejected, the admission policy becomes suspect.
But instead of concentrating on the changes in affirmative action, the proponents of diversity should concentrate on raising test scores for minorities.
posted on May 29, 2002 07:59:00 AM new
I always thought that bigotry was refusing to accept the facts when they showed that you were wrong.
of course the White trooper has to be lying.
look around yours if a foreign power was doing to our cities what some of our own people are doing we would blast them out of exisitence.
whats really sad is nothing i say is going to reach you. your people deserve a fair chance too. what these people are telling you is about unfairness and there is more of it each day.
posted on May 29, 2002 11:14:22 PM new
Well of course it's reverse descrimination. That's the whole idea behind affirmative action. Question is, is it justified? Should blacks (for example) be given a hand up, just because they were oppressed for generations?
Anyone who loses a promotion, entrance to college, etc., based on ethnic considerations has a right to be upset. I think it would be more appropriate to offer minorities a hand up earlier in their education, for example in the elementary schools.
This could be implemented by sharing equally taxes collected for schools. When I went to school, each district collected its own taxes. So if you lived in a rich neighborhood, you went to a rich school. The district I attended was one of the richest in California (second only to Beverly Hills), and we enjoyed opportunities not available to other students.
I feel this "colorblind" approach would be more fair than hiring/promoting/educating people based on skin color.
posted on May 30, 2002 03:45:22 AM new"district I attended was one of the richest in California (second only to Beverly Hills)'
I'm sure that we of the Reed Union School District would take exception to that, but I won't, not a representative product. Nevertheless, you're right, if such a thing as you propose could be made to pass there'd be widespread benefit as the result would be much like the solution offered by school busing. Instead of busing the kids to good schools they'd wire the money for good schools from the afluent base. However we already see how it works, or doesn't - the affluent simply take their kids along with their money elsewhere. Into the private sphere mostly. So then what to do? Why, force the issue through affirmative action and make the schools take and the employers hire in a formulated (by whom?) program until a parity is achieved. At that point all will be equal in everyone's eyes and there will be no further need for assistance for anyone at all. Presto! Now if only these poor newly oppressed white folk would learn to play ball and stop filing papers and snivelling on news shows, everything would be all right.
kid a scholarship. But I was an a-hole and kept working and didn't go on welfare, etc.
