|
American Universities, Bastions of Privilege and Hypocrisy? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| metalgearsolid |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
To elaborate, I don't think it's a matter of diversity, but rather a survival of the smartest. It's plain and simple white people try harder to succeed at school than blacksor hispanics. This is why they have better acceptance rates at these elitist universities than the minority races and this is coming from a Latino (or Hispanic, take your pick).
|
Hispanics don't try? My mother went to the best engineering school in this nation. Univeristy of California Berkely back in the 70s. She even got her masters there and to this date she has 5 patents. And that was only in two years of work before, my dad knocked her up; and she decided to be a mother.
Hispanics are smart. Don't generalize just because you(most likely) and your family are a bunch of idiots. Both my parents and brother are chm engs. chemical engineering is considered to be the hardest for any eng.
Another thing too. My grandfather was a supreme court judge for Mexico and his son is a federal prosecutor. I also happen to have several Hispanic uncles and cousins who are doctors and lawyers and Engineers. I don't know why you come off saying hispanics don't try or don't study.
Our people were the ones who came up with 0. And if you want to know the real reason to why people are the way they are. It's simply because they are lazy and don't want to put in the effort to succeed. It is also one of the reason why their isn't many engineers around. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
It may be a 'trend' but the correlation and what you're hinting at doesn't hold water.
There is nothing out there proving white people are smarter.
eod. |
I don't think it has anything to do with smarts, but everything to do with what their cultures value. I feel that asian and white children do better in school because their parents put more emphasis on it, whereas black and hispanic parents may put more emphasis on putting food on the table.
The other issue is their role models. When the most successful African Americans are all entertainers and athletes, that's not a good thing for the education of the black youths that look up ot them. |
|
|
| venomX |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
I disagree with the article regarding social inequality in American universities. The author has to understand that colleges are a business. To keep that business running they have to keep their standards and prices high in order to keep the lazy people out.
To elaborate, I don't think it's a matter of diversity, but rather a survival of the smartest. It's plain and simple white people try harder to succeed at school than blacksor hispanics. This is why they have better acceptance rates at these elitist universities than the minority races and this is coming from a Latino (or Hispanic, take your pick).
My high school (maynard evans) is a great example. It is an an F-graded school (link) with pitiful FCAT scores (link). The high school is 80% black (link) and has not improved whatsoever. 15 years ago that same high school was made up of mostly white people and used to be the number 1 school in the district or county. Unfortunately those are the only statistics I don't have, but by word of mouth from teachers who taught at my high school before I was even conceived this is how I know this.
At first I thought this was just a coincedence, but upon examination of another high school in my district who are also predominantly black they too suffered from the same low standards of academia.
I wish I could compare every high school to determine if certain races like to study more than other races, but that seems to be the trend where I live so to say that one race is given a free ride over the other sounds like a justification for students with poor grades to be allowed at these prestigious universities. There's a reason for the inequality in American universities, but it isn't race, it's intelligence. |
That has to be the most uninformed comment i have ever heard. Many studies have been published on the effect of socio-economic status on school achievement. Studies on the same thing your talking about, and after controlling for other variables the studies support the idea that school achievement is not due to race, its due to family backgound and socioeconomic status. The fact that is now failing has more to do with minorities having less money than whites in general not to the fact that they are minorities. Also maybe you want to re-read the article, as it actually points more towards more more of the people admitted into elite school being the offspring of either socially influcial people, extremely reach people or faculty regardless of how bad there grades are. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
we only use a small percantage of our brains. |
I'm not so sure of that. I do believe that all of our brains are used to some extent, but only a small % is used in actual thinking.
or something |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
I think my "survival of the smartest" comment might have led you to taking my point out of context. I do agree with you that the human body has an innate ability to sponge off a finite amount of intellectual capacity regardless of race, after all, we only use a small percantage of our brains. My point is that from a demographic standpoint certain races are more willing to use that intellectual capacity than others for some reason. This is when I branched off topic to a statement the author made about social inequality which I myself have taken out of context, hence the whole squabble with pkc. |
What about a nation like India, whose biggest export are it's highly trained people?
I can guarantee you that their education system is above and beyond anything we have over here, especially when it comes to their admission levels into universities.
It's a shame their curriculum / degrees don't translate very well once they come over the pond. |
|
|
| OurManFlint |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
It's just a demographic trend and off topic to the article at hand, don't get all worked up. |
My question would then be what enviorment these schools are in that you observe. Race doesn't have anything to do with smarts, but in terms of enviorment and economic status, success in academics can lack in terms of priority. Now, if you take a look at enviorments that are pretty bad, lots of crime, bad economic situations, then you will observe that a lot of the people there are african-americans, hispanics, asians, and white people (in general). Then you go to the suburbs in America, you will see a lot more of white kids. Kids in these enviorments tend to be more succesful in academics, but it has nothing to do with their race. They are not smarter.
This has to do with nurture vs. nature in that no races are smarter than others, but the enviorments they grow up and live in and their economic situations can have a lot to do with their outlook and success in academics. If you go to some really poor neiboorhood in the states where the kis are predominantly white, you will observe the same trends in that many of them will not go on to have success in academics.
Rich white kids are born into enviorments that expect them to go on to the universities, and they have the means to do it. It does not mean they are smarter. |
|
|
| kush paintings |
What a crock of . Seriously, while I realize this problem isnt completely non-existent it is nowhere near to the extent that would seem to be present in this douche bag's hyper-liberal world.
Three words: Need-blind admissions.
From wikipedia- A U.S. term denoting a college admission policy in which the admitting institution claims not to consider an applicant's financial situation when deciding admission. [Proper funds, scolarships, etc. are allocated to students based on need once accepted.]
Noteable colleges that participate in this:
Harvard, Brown, Columbia, California Institute of Technology, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Georgetown, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, U of Chicago, UPENN, Yale
So basically all of the top institutions in the country. Hmmmmm, that does seem awfuly unfair.
But how much do these universities really give. Well, I can tell you at my school, Brown I believe nearly 40% of the students receive some form of financial aid in one form or another. Also, this crackhead author completely overblows the legacy problem, which while prevelent at Harvard, is not nearly so at other top schools. Glad he didn't get on jocks for taking poor kids' spots at these school or else I would've really gotten mad.
[Update] Oh, yeah and I just found this...
 |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
My point is that from a demographic standpoint certain races are more willing to use that intellectual capacity than others for some reason. |
You have made an error in your interpretation of the data here. Your conclusion that lower test scores in certain demographic sub-sets is not supported by the data. All one can conclude from any data stating that non-whites acheive lower grades is simply that non-white students acheive lower grades. To infer that lower grades are a direct result of failing to use one's intellectual capacity is folly. There can be a multitude of reasons why non-whites acheive lower grades that have nothing to do with intellegence; culture bias curriculum or tests immediately spring to mind as a prime suspect. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by kush paintings
What a crock of . Seriously, while I realize this problem isnt completely non-existent it is nowhere near to the extent that would seem to be present in this douche bag's hyper-liberal world.
Three words: Need-blind admissions.
From wikipedia- A U.S. term denoting a college admission policy in which the admitting institution claims not to consider an applicant's financial situation when deciding admission. [Proper funds, scolarships, etc. are allocated to students based on need once accepted.]
Noteable colleges that participate in this:
Harvard, Brown, Columbia, California Institute of Technology, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Georgetown, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, U of Chicago, UPENN, Yale
So basically all of the top institutions in the country. Hmmmmm, that does seem awfuly unfair.
But how much do these universities really give. Well, I can tell you at my school, Brown I believe nearly 40% of the students receive some form of financial aid in one form or another. Also, this crackhead author completely overblows the legacy problem, which while prevelent at Harvard, is not nearly so at other top schools. Glad he didn't get on jocks for taking poor kids' spots at these school or else I would've really gotten mad. |
According to the Wall Street Journal reporter ("douche bag hyper-liberal"), only 40% of all spots at elite universities (which I assume are more than Harvard) are there for people with good academic skills. That is not acceptable. I somehow understand how you could defend a system where you have to pay a lot of money to get into top universities (I dont agree with it, but I understand the reasoning), BUT a system where you get into universities depending on who your father is, is just ing insane. |
|
|
| kush paintings |
And I am telling you as I sit typing in my dorm room at an Ivy League school that around that same number, 40%, receive financial aid from my school, so unless ALL of the other students got in because ma and pa, then this guys figures just arent adding up. I hope you read my part about the blind admissions process in my earlier post, and didn't just ignore that tiny part of the elite universities system of admissions that the douche bag hyper-liberal failed to account for. Now, I guess you could say that they could have a quota of how many students they truly look under the blind admissions process to let in and then setting off a significant (and therefore neccessary to account for) portion to the kids of powerful parents. If you re-read what I just typed you can see that process is about on par with some of the 9-11 conspiracy threads, as all information available on the process refutes the type of magnitude of a problem the author claims is out there.
Just to give you some actual numbers, of 100 people I know well enough as to know how they get into my school, 3 got in because of their parents. My school, actually has been exposed for letting in a lot of hollywood stars' kids and that number is actually 5 or 6. Our undergrad population is 5,000 and change. |
|
|
| stevieboy32808 |
| quote: | Originally posted by metalgearsolid
Hispanics don't try? My mother went to the best engineering school in this nation. Univeristy of California Berkely back in the 70s. She even got her masters there and to this date she has 5 patents. And that was only in two years of work before, my dad knocked her up; and she decided to be a mother. Another thing too. My grandfather was a supreme court judge for Mexico and his son is a federal prosecutor. I also happen to have several Hispanic uncles and cousins who are doctors and lawyers and Engineers. I don't know why you come off saying hispanics don't try or don't study. |
Since when does your family account for the 41 million Hispanics living in the United States or more specifically 12 million Hispanics enrolled in school. (link).
| quote: | Originally posted by metalgearsolid
Hispanics are smart. Don't generalize just because you(most likely) and your family are a bunch of idiots. Both my parents and brother are chm engs. chemical engineering is considered to be the hardest for any eng. |
I never said they were stupid and I won't even begin to brag about my academic status as you have done with your family because it proves nothing. Like I said before there are 12 million other Hispanics that you have unaccounted for.
You also speak of generalizations by sly-fully associating the word to stereotypes. Stereotypes hold no substantial basis and are not the type of point I’m to trying to make. In reality, when I refer to generalizations I am not resorting to stereotypes, but actual data from a demographic standpoint. If you have ever taken a decent statistics class you will run into a word called outlier. Outliers are spikes in data which stand out the most and require immediate attention. In this case the outlier or trend which stood out the most was race. My comments are based on outliers not some random variable.
| quote: | Originally posted by metalgearsolid
Our people were the ones who came up with 0. And if you want to know the real reason to why people are the way they are. It's simply because they are lazy and don't want to put in the effort to succeed. It is also one of the reason why their isn't many engineers around. |
Yes, that was the whole point of my post! Thanks for reinforcing what I have already stated. The article mentioned social inequality which I accidentally interpreted as race, but my argument is that this inequality has nothing to do with race, but more on how certain races hold up when it comes to intelligence.
That post of mine was meant to raise the following question: Why is it that some races perform academically better than others given that we are all born with the same anatomical brain structure. Like I said blacks and hispanics are just as capable at learning material just as whites or asians are but for some underlying reasons some races try harder than others and I want to know why? At least you gave me one reason which was laziness.
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
I don't think it has anything to do with smarts, but everything to do with what their cultures value. I feel that asian and white children do better in school because their parents put more emphasis on it, whereas black and hispanic parents may put more emphasis on putting food on the table.
The other issue is their role models. When the most successful African Americans are all entertainers and athletes, that's not a good thing for the education of the black youths that look up ot them. |
Thank goodness. At least there’s someone here who gets what I mean. | quote: | Originally posted by venomX
That has to be the most uninformed comment i have ever heard. Many studies have been published on the effect of socio-economic status on school achievement. Studies on the same thing your talking about, and after controlling for other variables the studies support the idea that school achievement is not due to race, its due to family backgound and socioeconomic status. The fact that is now failing has more to do with minorities having less money than whites in general not to the fact that they are minorities. Also maybe you want to re-read the article, as it actually points more towards more more of the people admitted into elite school being the offspring of either socially influcial people, extremely reach people or faculty regardless of how bad there grades are. |
Uninformed is a big stretch there venom. I have laid down examples of 2 schools who follow the same general trend based on race with links to the statistics. I don't say it, my own public school district does. Obviously they don't intend for a person to take the race data from the section and make their own conclusions, but I did it for a reason. See above post regarding outliers.
If you aren't satisfied with the 2 schools I used in my example why don't we focus on the entire United States population. I'm sure you've heard of the census which is given every ten years. This census is administered by our government for demographic purposes. Here is the following data for the number of students that have attained either a high school diploma or college degree classified by race. The data is in thousands meaning you have to add three zeros at the end of each value:
disclaimer: I’ve condensed the data to focus on race and graduation percentages
One thing that all races have in common is that most of those who graduated high school don’t go on to become college graduates. Only 30 to 50 percent of whites and asians graduate college versus 11 to 17 of hispanics and blacks. From a high school perspective 87 to 89 percent of whites and asians have high school diplomas versus 57 to 80 percent of blacks and hispanics. Again we notice this drop which further ponders the question I originally posted above and the reason I made the comment to begin with.
Source: http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-550.pdf
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
I'm not so sure of that. I do believe that all of our brains are used to some extent, but only a small % is used in actual thinking.
or something |
This isn’t relevant to what I said, then again my post isn’t relevant to the threadstarter’s, but you’re right we use all parts of our brain, not a small percentage nor to some extent as you put it. It turns out that’s a myth. Thanks for that! :)
Source: http://www.brainconnection.com/topi...n=fa/brain-myth
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
What about a nation like India, whose biggest export are it's highly trained people?
I can guarantee you that their education system is above and beyond anything we have over here, especially when it comes to their admission levels into universities.
It's a shame their curriculum / degrees don't translate very well once they come over the pond. |
I’d say India is an exception. |
|
|
| venomX |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
Uninformed is a big stretch there venom. I have laid down examples of 2 schools who follow the same general trend based on race with links to the statistics. I don't say it, my own public school district does. Obviously they don't intend for a person to take the race data from the section and make their own conclusions, but I did it for a reason. See above post regarding outliers.
|
Im sorry, but since when are case studies valid as means of proving ideas? Even at that just because there is a correlation between the two things, namely being black and poor academic achievement, that does not mean that BEING black CAUSES academic underachievement. And i did outline that there have been studies made on this phenomena and its related to another variable, socioeconomic status. Hence your arguments dont even support your thesis of 'survival of the smartest' because whites only outperform minorities because they tend to have a higher socioeconomic status due to the biases of the past in regards to race. This has idea is supported due to the fact that after controlling for socioeconomic status and family background blacks (and other minorities) perform equal to whites. I think its more or less an established fact that whites are in a majority position and dominate a lot of fields due to the head start they had when the colonies where settled in the americas. So even with your two case studies there, you have no proof whatsoever to support your idea.
Also you have again failed to address how this 'trend' you have 'discovered' (because it hasnt already been regurgitated thousands of times, mainly by people with a racist agenda, note that im not calling you a racist), so yes you have failed to discuss the actual topic, namely the fact that universities are more and more basing their admissions on social status not on brain power, but have inserted this red herring of how other races are apparently 'more prone to damage schools reputations'. So now, wont you enlighten us as to how your 'survival of the smartest' blends with the ivy league universities letting more and more people in because of social status and not their 'smarts'? |
|
|
|
|
