|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 05 2017 03:28 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 03:27 GreenHorizons wrote:
I'll tell you right now that affirmative action is far from perfect. It's mostly been outdated from it's original intent (reducing people citing skin color as the reason they wouldn't hire people). It's just the best we have and going back to before we had it is obviously a terrible idea.
I'm interested in how people who don't like it would like to see it fixed, but going back to not having it isn't an option. Make it based on socioeconomics instead of race.
It's not an "instead," it's an "and." That way you don't cause the most harm to the people who benefited least from being from a privileged group (whether it's SES or race). There are benefits to being white (or Asian) that aren't captured based purely upon income, just as their are benefits to being rich that aren't captured by race. And they tend to interact and scale pretty heavily with one another.
|
On August 05 2017 03:55 Ghostcom wrote:
I never thought I would see the day where people agreed with the "who" being more important than the "what". It's sad times indeed. We are indeed living in a post-factual society.
It's hard to make arguments and take potential solutions on the assumption of 'good faith' when the idea of 'good faith' arrangements have been so tainted in our society.
edit - taking it beyond politics
At work, there is a fairly centralized group of people that I support on various things. When a case comes in, who it's from matters almost as much as what it's about. With one user, I might think "they've generally done their basic troubleshooting, we can skip to the more involved solutions", another I'll think "I wonder how many people he's asked before me", and yet another will be met with "we're going to have to start at the basics, I know I've walked through this with them before".
But this is the inherent situation when one person undermines their own integrity - arguments, proposals, or questions get met with reservations and a heaping bag of salt, regardless of the merit.
|
On August 05 2017 04:06 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 03:55 Ghostcom wrote:
I never thought I would see the day where people agreed with the "who" being more important than the "what". It's sad times indeed. We are indeed living in a post-factual society. It's hard to make arguments and take potential solutions on the assumption of 'good faith' when the idea of 'good faith' arrangements have been so tainted in our society.
I'm not arguing for taking something on "good faith". I'm arguing that a moral argument is independent of who presents it - i.e. an unjust system is unjust regardless of who points out that it is unjust.
EDIT: To respond to your edit: your example is different from the argument being presented. What I'm arguing is that 2+2=4 (edit2: obviously pending on all the required axioms we usually employ in maths) regardless of who says it. The question for the courts is whether or not 2+2=4, not whether or not the one arguing it wants to misuse it to build the atom-bomb.
EDIT3: This entire discussion reminds me of this: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/13/feminist-geographers-dont-cite-research-white-men/
|
|
|
Could someone take the time and describe exactly how college admission currently works in the US? Because i think everyone here assumes that everyone knows, but not all people have the same picture of it.
What information do schools have when deciding who gets access?
Here in Germany, it is only based on grades and possibly an entrance exam. There are usually systems in place to combat things like judging people based on if they are "Karl Müller" or "Kelal Yildirim", usually by way of simply not giving the people who decide access to the name in the first place. But even then admission is pretty strictly regulated by law, there is not a lot of whimsy by random people involved. I gather that is different in the US?
|
On August 05 2017 05:04 Simberto wrote:
Could someone take the time and describe exactly how college admission currently works in the US? Because i think everyone here assumes that everyone knows, but not all people have the same picture of it.
What information do schools have when deciding who gets access?
Here in Germany, it is only based on grades and possibly an entrance exam. There are usually systems in place to combat things like judging people based on if they are "Karl Müller" or "Kelal Yildirim", usually by way of simply not giving the people who decide access to the name in the first place. But even then admission is pretty strictly regulated by law, there is not a lot of whimsy by random people involved. I gather that is different in the US?
It depends on the school. Private schools can ask different things and take different things into consideration
|
On August 05 2017 04:16 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 04:06 jcarlsoniv wrote:On August 05 2017 03:55 Ghostcom wrote:
I never thought I would see the day where people agreed with the "who" being more important than the "what". It's sad times indeed. We are indeed living in a post-factual society. It's hard to make arguments and take potential solutions on the assumption of 'good faith' when the idea of 'good faith' arrangements have been so tainted in our society. I'm not arguing for taking something on "good faith". I'm arguing that a moral argument is independent of who presents it - i.e. an unjust system is unjust regardless of who points out that it is unjust. EDIT: To respond to your edit: your example is different from the argument being presented. What I'm arguing is that 2+2=4 (edit2: obviously pending on all the required axioms we usually employ in maths) regardless of who says it. The question for the courts is whether or not 2+2=4, not whether or not the one arguing it wants to misuse it to build the atom-bomb. EDIT3: This entire discussion reminds me of this: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/13/feminist-geographers-dont-cite-research-white-men/
Well, it's also a bit less concrete than 2+2, but fair enough. And overall, I agree with you that, ideally, all ideas and arguments should be taken at face value based on merit rather than letting emotions and political views get in the way of it. But humans are messy.
I would tend to be more skeptical seeing a cartographic argument from a flat-earther than an astronaut, regardless of what the argument is (to go even further into analogous hyperbole).
|
Yes, it varies wildly and there are not standardized exams beyond the SATs. Harvard is very different from Ohio State(which accepts almost all Ohio residents at some level). We also lack the directed post high school education system for trade/non-academic work skills.
|
Top Dem Wants Congress to Investigate Trump Transcript Leaks
Congress should investigate the leaking of transcripts of calls between President Donald Trump and world leaders, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee said on Thursday. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), called the leak “absolutely” troubling, arguing that it would cause potentially-serious complications to the White House’s ability to conduct foreign policy. “A president of the United States, a governor would tell us they've got to be able to have confidential conversations,” Warner told The Daily Beast in an interview. “And I think it was disgraceful that those [came out].” On Thursday morning, the Washington Post published full transcripts of Trump’s calls with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. The transcripts revealed tense exchanges and candid admissions from Trump about topics like refugee admissions and the border wall. But it was the act of leaking itself that shook national security experts who worried the publishing of transcripts would dramatically curtail Trumps ability to have candid, strategic exchanges with fellow world leaders. While the leak may be “reflective of a chaotic White House,” Warner said, it still constituted a massive breach of norms and was serious enough to merit a congressional inquiry. “Whether that is Intel or Judicial [committees] looking into it, somebody ought to,” he said.
www.thedailybeast.com
|
On August 05 2017 05:04 Simberto wrote:
Could someone take the time and describe exactly how college admission currently works in the US? Because i think everyone here assumes that everyone knows, but not all people have the same picture of it.
What information do schools have when deciding who gets access?
Here in Germany, it is only based on grades and possibly an entrance exam. There are usually systems in place to combat things like judging people based on if they are "Karl Müller" or "Kelal Yildirim", usually by way of simply not giving the people who decide access to the name in the first place. But even then admission is pretty strictly regulated by law, there is not a lot of whimsy by random people involved. I gather that is different in the US?
As has been stated it varies between schools (private/public, sought/not-sought, and a bunch of other stuff). But it's generally a lot more like trying to get a job than what we are used to in Europe.
Some of the requirements might be:
A CV (which is why stuff like volunteer work, extra-curricular activities, and sports are so common among US youth)
A motivational essay
An essay on a topic decided by the school
Personal information (which can include a shitload of different stuff including economy and criminal record) on you (and in some cases rest of the family)
Information on grades as well as your admission test score in the field (i.e. MCAT for medicine)
Recommendations from prior teachers/volunteers/coaches
You gather all this info and send it to the schools of which you are interested in (and think you can get into which usually means you apply for like 5-10 colleges - of these 2 will typically be safety schools, 2 be target schools and the rest will be "reach" schools i.e. schools that are slightly outside your reach based on prior years admissions). For each school you have to pay an application fee (average 41 USD, some charge 0, some charge upwards of 90) which is non-refundable.
There are then typically multiple rounds carried out by the admission process and you typically have to go through at least one interview (skype or in-person) depending on how prestigious the school is.
After all this is done you wait to hear back from your schools on whether or not you are accepted and whether or not you got any monetary support (if you applied for it). There is no real coordination across schools.
EDIT: For comparison:
In Denmark you can get accepted in two ways:
Let's use medicine for an example. You can study medicine at 4 universities in Denmark. Let's say there are 1400 spots each year (made up number, although not too far off).
Quota 1: Central coordination. Only your grades matter. I.e. there might be 700 nationwide who has applied to study medicine in Copenhagen, there are 200 spots, they take the top 200 according to grades. 500 rest enters a similar process for their 2nd priority (medicine in Aarhus for example), along with all those that didn't apply in Copenhagen (because they knew they didn't have a chance) but did apply in Aarhus (so there might be 700 competing for spots again). The lowest grade of those accepted is published each year so people know where they have a shot at getting in.
Quota 2: University centered. Slightly more complex - typically used by those who got too bad grades to have a shot at getting in through quota 1 to the study of their dreams: You write a motivational essay and attach your CV - both focused on why you are going to be a great doctor despite having performed poorly academically in high school. The next step varies a bit across universities, some give you a test and some simply interview you. There is then a selection committee at each university who accepts the students they consider appropriate limited by the number of spaces reserved (typically 1/3 of the spots given to Quota 1).
|
On August 05 2017 05:04 Simberto wrote:
Here in Germany, it is only based on grades and possibly an entrance exam. There are usually systems in place to combat things like judging people based on if they are "Karl Müller" or "Kelal Yildirim", usually by way of simply not giving the people who decide access to the name in the first place. But even then admission is pretty strictly regulated by law, there is not a lot of whimsy by random people involved. I gather that is different in the US?
The short answer is that it's a very subjective process where each school has their own nebulous, poorly-defined process involving grades, recommendation letters, standardized testing, extracurricular activities, essays/writing samples, interviews, and some poorly-defined concept of "fit". Basically every school does whatever the hell they want, and affirmative action is supposed to act as a failsafe against an ill-meaning admissions committee using that to unfairly warp admissions practices.
The purely objective examination-based admissions system utilized in European and Asian countries has always had it's proponents, but never really gained traction. Likewise there's always been some push for 'race-blind" admission, where admissions committees outright do not receive information about the applicant's race, but the central role of the interview (though I personally believe that it's importance to the college admission process is wildly overstated by some) has been a confounding factor for that.
|
One of the arguments for diverse racially classes in the US is that is provides value to students through exposures to other cultures in the form of their peers. The US is a massive country and the experience of New York City is different from Boston, is different from Columbus Ohio. The same goes with race and culture. Being black in Chicago is different from being black in Portland Oregon. That is why colleges have factored in race to their admissions process. It is far from the controlling factor in admission, but one of the ones that schools use. And because students have so many options in the US, denial does not mean the student cannot attend college.
|
On August 05 2017 05:40 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 05:04 Simberto wrote:
Could someone take the time and describe exactly how college admission currently works in the US? Because i think everyone here assumes that everyone knows, but not all people have the same picture of it.
What information do schools have when deciding who gets access?
Here in Germany, it is only based on grades and possibly an entrance exam. There are usually systems in place to combat things like judging people based on if they are "Karl Müller" or "Kelal Yildirim", usually by way of simply not giving the people who decide access to the name in the first place. But even then admission is pretty strictly regulated by law, there is not a lot of whimsy by random people involved. I gather that is different in the US? As has been stated it varies between schools (private/public, sought/not-sought, and a bunch of other stuff). But it's generally a lot more like trying to get a job than what we are used to in Europe. Some of the requirements might be: A CV (which is why stuff like volunteer work, extra-curricular activities, and sports are so common among US youth) A motivational essay An essay on a topic decided by the school Personal information (which can include a shitload of different stuff including economy and criminal record) on you (and in some cases rest of the family) Information on grades as well as your admission test score in the field (i.e. MCAT for medicine) Recommendations from prior teachers/volunteers/coaches You gather all this info and send it to the schools of which you are interested in (and think you can get into which usually means you apply for like 5-10 colleges - of these 2 will typically be safety schools, 2 be target schools and the rest will be "reach" schools i.e. schools that are slightly outside your reach based on prior years admissions). For each school you have to pay an application fee (average 41 USD, some charge 0, some charge upwards of 90) which is non-refundable. There are then typically multiple rounds carried out by the admission process and you typically have to go through at least one interview (skype or in-person) depending on how prestigious the school is. After all this is done you wait to hear back from your schools on whether or not you are accepted and whether or not you got any monetary support (if you applied for it). There is no real coordination across schools.
Yeah, this is basically it. But you only put in a cursory mention for monetary support, which I think needs a little more expansion.
There is a separate application, called the FAFSA, that gives you federal financial aid, and is in large part used to determine the financial aid a school will give from its own coffers. The sticker price on schools is highly flexible by scholarships and aid, a roundabout form of price discrimination in practice. You give your tax info and that of your family and they give you a mix of loan money and grant money to pay for your otherwise obscenely expensive attendance cost.
There is some coordination across some schools with regards to this process. Common App is one example. But often it's more trouble than it's worth, considering that these schools tend to get swamped with applications because of the ease of applying.
Personal information includes race, gender, income, that sort of stuff as well. You don't have to say your actual info but if you don't then you will generally be assumed to be about the equivalent of the least favorable of that group. Some schools do "legacy" admissions which mean that if your siblings/parents went to that school you have a better chance of going there as well.
That's all the traditional college fare though. See also the 538 piece that looks at it from a statistical perspective; it's a very good read.
|
On August 05 2017 05:49 Plansix wrote:
One of the arguments for diverse racially classes in the US is that is provides value to students through exposures to other cultures in the form of their peers. The US is a massive country and the experience of New York City is different from Boston, is different from Columbus Ohio. The same goes with race and culture. Being black in Chicago is different from being black in Portland Oregon. That is why colleges have factored in race to their admissions process. It is far from the controlling factor in admission, but one of the ones that schools use. And because students have so many options in the US, denial does not mean the student cannot attend college.
I've heard a half-joking statement that "diversity" at Harvard is a white kid, an Indian kid, and an Asian kid, all from big cities whose parents are all doctors. If you look at race without SES that's basically what you get.
|
I applied to University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Got in 1st try, 1st month of senior year. No follow up. It varies.
|
On August 05 2017 05:53 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 05:49 Plansix wrote:
One of the arguments for diverse racially classes in the US is that is provides value to students through exposures to other cultures in the form of their peers. The US is a massive country and the experience of New York City is different from Boston, is different from Columbus Ohio. The same goes with race and culture. Being black in Chicago is different from being black in Portland Oregon. That is why colleges have factored in race to their admissions process. It is far from the controlling factor in admission, but one of the ones that schools use. And because students have so many options in the US, denial does not mean the student cannot attend college. I've heard a half-joking statement that "diversity" at Harvard is a white kid, an Indian kid, and an Asian kid, all from big cities whose parents are all doctors. If you look at race without SES that's basically what you get.
And Harvard doesn’t ignore SES. But they do have a problem with being the school for the super wealthy and those people making up the vast majority of their students. I will laugh pretty hard if this lawsuit just turns up that Harvard favors wealthy people over all others.
|
On August 05 2017 05:49 Plansix wrote:
One of the arguments for diverse racially classes in the US is that is provides value to students through exposures to other cultures in the form of their peers. The US is a massive country and the experience of New York City is different from Boston, is different from Columbus Ohio. The same goes with race and culture. Being black in Chicago is different from being black in Portland Oregon. That is why colleges have factored in race to their admissions process. It is far from the controlling factor in admission, but one of the ones that schools use. And because students have so many options in the US, denial does not mean the student cannot attend college.
this argument is a tale as old as time, and is just an old tactic on a different playing field. its exacty the same as what plantation owners did with their crops. there is nothing new under the sun and everyone just keeps on trucking the same way.
am i doing this right, P6?
|
On August 05 2017 06:03 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 05:49 Plansix wrote:
One of the arguments for diverse racially classes in the US is that is provides value to students through exposures to other cultures in the form of their peers. The US is a massive country and the experience of New York City is different from Boston, is different from Columbus Ohio. The same goes with race and culture. Being black in Chicago is different from being black in Portland Oregon. That is why colleges have factored in race to their admissions process. It is far from the controlling factor in admission, but one of the ones that schools use. And because students have so many options in the US, denial does not mean the student cannot attend college. this argument is a tale as old as time, and is just an old tactic on a different playing field. its exacty the same as what plantation owners did with their crops. there is nothing new under the sun and everyone just keeps on trucking the same way. am i doing this right, P6?
No, you didn’t send by PM. You posted it in the thread, even after I conceded to your criticism of my posting yesterday. But maybe it was never really about the quality of my posting?
|
An important part of CNN's report yesterday that may have gotten buried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
