

Does Diversity Punish Asians, Poor Whites and Others? - cwan
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2010/07/how_diversity_punishes_asians.html

======
jerf
It is mathematically impossible to privilege one group without
"disprivileging" another in a zero-sum game like college admissions. The
question of whether affirmative action "punishes" some people isn't even
interesting, the question is a borderline-tautological "yes". The question is,
is that what we want to do? And even if historically the answer was "yes", is
it _still_ what we want to do? And what do we want to do in the future?

I'm not commenting on the answer to those questions, subtly or otherwise.
(Except inasmuch that some people would rather we not ask them at all and just
take various answers as axiomatically true without examination.)

~~~
cma
In a similar spirit:

It is mathematically impossible to privilege one group without
"disprivileging" another in a zero-sum game like college admissions. The
question of whether alumni-preference "punishes" some people isn't even
interesting, the question is a borderline-tautological "yes". The question is,
is that what we want to do? And even if historically the answer was "yes", is
it still what we want to do? And what do we want to do in the future?

I'm not commenting on the answer to those questions, subtly or otherwise.
(Except inasmuch that some people would rather we not ask them at all and just
take various answers as axiomatically true without examination.)

(just for reference, around the time of the supreme court cases re: Michigan
Law School, alumni preference was weighted at least as strongly as race
amongst schools that used quantitative point systems for admissions)

~~~
cema

      The question of whether alumni-preference "punishes" some people 
      isn't even interesting, the question is a borderline-tautological "yes". 
      The question is, is that what we want to do?
    

I think we want to just stop it. Why is it even a question? I understand it is
not that easy to do, but certainly easier (and less dangerous for
participants) than stopping the segregation was, no? I understand there are
important differences between alumni-based preferences and "race"-based
preferences (such as whether the State and Federal institutions need to be
involved etc), but I think these only work towards making it easier.

EDIT: quote format.

~~~
cma
I agree. I think federal funding, scholarship, loans, and research dollars
should be withheld from all schools with alumni preference rules going
forward. Period.

Most arguments against removing alumni preference only apply when you look at
one school in isolation and simply disappear when you consider all schools
removing them at once.

(Federal non-profit tax-emempt status should probably be included in my list
of things-that-should-disappear-unless alumni-preference-is-dropped, but I
haven't thought seriously about the likely objections (religious schools
etc.))

------
alexandros
There have been many formulations of the root problem in such cases,
Campbell's formulation fits best here.

Campbell's law: The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social
decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the
more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended
to monitor.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbells_Law>

------
cantastoria
I often wondered what psychological effects these diversity programs have on
those who are supposedly benefiting from them. Do they walk around campus
thinking to themselves "I'm here because I'm black"? This goes double for
those minority students who would've been accepted without preferential
treatment.

~~~
jeb
I think that a lot of them prefer to be in the school and wonder if they are
there because they are black than not be there at all.

~~~
cantastoria
Oh I'm sure this is true on some level but it must be difficult to have to
constantly deal with the assumption that you're there because of your race.
It's just another level of scrutiny, and I guess racism, which is ironically
created by the program meant to destroy it.

~~~
jeb
It's about the same as constantly having to deal with the assumption you are
there for geographical reasons, because you speak with a southern accent.

~~~
cantastoria
Yes but there are few (if any) universities that have a "southern accent"
based affirmative action policy. If such a policy existed it would exactly the
same.

~~~
jeb
All the schools have geographical quotas. They don't just allow people from
one region to come in, no matter how great they are.

Was there not a problem with one of those schools where 40% where jewish when
admission was only based on test-scores?

~~~
cantastoria
_All the schools have geographical quotas_

Sure but not different admissions criteria based on geography. You still have
to meet the criteria regardless. Not so for race based preference systems
which are well known for relaxing standards to achieve the desired racial
balance.

If a particular school is 40% Jewish and those students are all there because
they met the admissions criteria then so be it. It's absurd to create an elite
admissions policy and then create preference programs for designated races.
I'd much rather the standards were lowered until the desired racial balance
occurred organically. However, universities seem to want it both ways.

~~~
jeb
How about we just cut out the crap and make admission based on scores only.
This will of course mean that your chance of getting in will become really,
really low, unless you were jewish or asian.

All these people who cry out for affirmative action to be removed, I will see
them write two pages about why it should not be there, but they will never
advocate the really fair solution, because it will make them extremlely
unlikely to ever get into the schools.

What you are saying is pretty silly, by the way. An elite school like that is
admitting perhaps 50 black people. Are you saying of all the applications from
black people they received, they did not find 50 that met the cut-off mark?
That's a bit unlikely, is it not?

The score of the blacks may have been below the average of the other admitees,
but they were not BAD. It's an elite school, they will not put dunces in
there, and there are certainly enough black applicants with the appropriate
scores.

If you want a score based system, then say so and accept that whites will be a
tiny minority in those schools. But don't try to have this hybrid thing that
keeps the whites in and the blacks out.

Either scores and nothing else, or let the schools decide. Choose one, and
lobby for that, and not AGAINST affirmative action.

~~~
cantastoria
_All these people who cry out for affirmative action to be removed, I will see
them write two pages about why it should not be there, but they will never
advocate the really fair solution, because it will make them extremlely
unlikely to ever get into the schools._

But this is essentially how admissions works for whites and asians. They look
at your scores if you make the cutoff your in (barring sports scholarships or
legacies which I'm also against).

 _Are you saying of all the applications from black people they received, they
did not find 50 that met the cut-off mark? That's a bit unlikely, is it not?_

Then why do they have different admissions standards for minority applicants?
If it were possible for minority applicants to meet the normal admissions
standards affirmative action programs would be unnecessary.

 _If you want a score based system, then say so and accept that whites will be
a tiny minority in those schools_

I want a score based system. I'm against affirmative action precisely because
it is a hybrid system. Whites and Asians are held to one standard, minorities
to another. As I've said before, if you want to admit lower scoring minority
applicants adjust the general admissions standards accordingly so they can get
in.

~~~
jeb
You have still not made it clear. Do you REALLY want a score-only based
systems that is going to clearly favour people from one small area of the U.S,
or do you just not want minorities to get in easier?

What do you think of the fact that score based systems will lead to a very
one-track kind of thinking process coming out of those schools?

------
CoryMathews
Does it even matter what race someone puts down on those? On the last US
census I put my race as human, although technically (and visually) I am white,
but my background is such a mutt, or not traced, that it doesn't really matter
anyway. On top of that I grew up in a city thats over 60% (south Texas)
Hispanic. That will change my views to be more "Hispanic like" vs someone with
the exact same racial qualities living in, say, NY. Hell when I go to home
depot they say things in English then Spanish on the intercoms.

It also seems lately that half the people I meet are half Mexican and half
white. What should they put? Every one I have asked puts Hispanic because in
general they get more that way.

I guess it comes down to an obviously flawed system. Possibly "diversify"
based on income, or location over race.

~~~
jeb
I'm not sure you get the point of 'diversity'. The U.S has a class-based
system that is very very strongly correlated with skin-color. Dark skin ->
lower class, worker. White skin -> upper class, college educated. The system
is there to spread dark skin across all strata of society, breaking the
stereotype that a particular skin color belongs in a particular lower strata.

~~~
cantastoria
_The system is there to spread dark skin across all strata of society,
breaking the stereotype that a particular skin color belongs in a particular
lower strata._

The problem with this though is that whites have to pretend that the system
doesn't exist for it work. If dark-skinned students are allowed in because of
a well known preference program the stereotype is in fact reinforced.

~~~
jeb
In the short term it is reinforced. But on the longer term, you create a wide
array of dark skinned college educated people who have college level jobs.
College educated tend to breed college educated, and family/relatives will
tend to be college educated.

So in the medium term, the current state that the black community is in will
change towards a more intellectual and educated one.

------
mkramlich
I wonder if anyone has ever seriously proposed adding a rule to the NBA (US
professional basketball league) that requires a minimum of say 75% of the
players to be white? In order that the diversity of the team more accurately
reflect the racial composition of the US, and to be more fair to white people.
Also require that say 12% of all swimming teams are black, and so on.

Just food for thought, not serious proposals.

~~~
jeb
How about making the elite institutions ONLY merit based. Then it would become
60% jewish and 30% asian, 8% white and the remaining 2% shared by the other
minorities. Is that okay with you?

~~~
mkramlich
It's hard to be opposed to merit-only requirements. It's not clear to me why
we have to distort anything if we truly want to live in a world that is blind
to color, gender, age, etc.

can you imagine if MLK's famous speech was this instead:

"I want my children to be judged not by the color of their skin but by the
content of their character. Unless applying for college. Or grants. Or aid
from the government. Or (...)"

~~~
jeb
Then say that. When you make your arguments, don't say "let's get rid of
affirmative action". Say "let's make the admission process merit-based only".

Of course, you realise what you're saying then? You're saying you want 30% of
all students in all elite colleges to likely come from new york. That's going
to create a very monotonous, one-track kind of thought coming out of those
places. Those schools that are currently the best in the world, will start
producing similar thinking people with little exposure to diversity of thought
or diversity of individuals.

Is that what you want? You are willing to fundamentally change the characters
of these schools to meet some criteria of 'fair' that basically only uses a
single attribute to judge people?

------
mkramlich
This is one of the taboo subjects on the Internet where it's possible to say
something that is factually true and yet you can be downvoted into oblivion if
it is "not PC", so watch out folks.

------
wushupork
So in order to not be screwed by the system, should my hapa kids self identify
as asian or white?

~~~
rsheridan6
Try to pass them off as Hispanic.

~~~
wushupork
funny you mention that as many asian/white mixes end up looking very Hispanic

------
carbocation
For what it's worth, this data is from 1997. (E.g., see table 3.4 from the
book being discussed, _No longer separate, not yet equal: race and class in
elite college admission_ , by Espenshade et al.)

Also - and this is not exactly a problem, just a methodological feature to be
aware of - it appears that they produced their models by aggregating the data
together across schools.

------
sliverstorm
> an estimated 40-50 percent of (students in Universities) categorized as
> black are Afro-Caribbean or African immigrants, or the children of such
> immigrants

That's interesting. I'm curious what the cause for this is.

~~~
jeb
That's because the people from those areas did not face the travails that
american blacks went through. I believe that that slavery thing and back-of-
the-bus thing 40 years ago, and no-blacks-on-mtv 20 years ago left its mark.

The immigrants are coming in not feeling like they are the bottom of the
barrel.

~~~
cema
I suspect the reason is closer to what you wrote in the second paragraph than
the first paragraph. Personal point of view, longing for education and hard
work may be accounting for most of the immigrants' success, and vice versa.
This attitude, imho, does stem (perhaps to a very large extent) from the
racial situation in the USA before the 1960s, however, it is not its direct
consequence and, moreover, that situation was not unique to the US (especially
if we go back to "that slavery thing", widespread in the West Indies and
indeed around the world, unfortunately).

Incidentally, while I appear to mostly disagree with you on this issue, I had
to upvote you back to neutral (1 point) because I thought your comment was
legitimate and thoughtful and did not deserve a downvote.

~~~
jeb
Votes don't matter, doing the right thing is not a popularity contest.

People who are raised in a lower class from which there is no breaking out
become apathetic. In the west-indies or in Africa, even though they were poor,
they could always become rich. They could always become upper class just by
working hard and making money.

In the U.S, this was impossible until very very recently, because just by
being black, you could not be upper class. If MTV would not play black music,
then what white man would say 'sir' to a black man in the 80s?

When there is no opportunity for you to advance, you become apathetic and
resigned to your fate. It's difficult to work hard when you have already been
told you'll never get promoted.

Immigrant blacks don't see the ceiling. As more immigrant blacks come in, the
american black children are looking up to these people, and the attitudes are
changing. But this is a slow process, and would be accelerated by increasing
the average educational level of the American black.

------
lkrubner
It is surprising, and disappointing, that in 2010 we still need to have a
conversation about whether diversity is important. I'm especially surprised to
see this come up on Hacker News, rather than some fringe site.

This debate has been going on for 40 years now. I would think by now its been
established that diversity has importance in its own right, not just in what
it does for individuals who are included on campus for non-traditional
reasons, but also for all the other people on campus. Certainly, diversity on
campus is important for everyone who aspires to any kind of leadership
position, since any leader today will be leading in a diverse environment.

~~~
patrickgzill
If Diversity is such a strength, how come the homogeneous Chinese, Japanese,
and Indians (ok, there is some diversity in India, but only due to a high
population over a wide area) are kicking our "diverse" butts in so many
fields?

~~~
jeb
America is very diverse, and it's the number 1 economy in the world, even
though a place like china has 4 times as many people.

Europe, which is pretty diverse, is also massively successful.

~~~
Ras_
Scandinavia?

------
jeb
Come on guys. Let's imagine a hypothetical situation where blacks are dumber
than anyone else. Blacks are ALREADY at the bottom of the socio-economic
classes, they are already responsible for a majority of crime, what EXACTLY do
you think would be the result of a fair admission process?

These people who are at the bottom will stay even more firmly entrenched at
the bottom, will commit more crime and continue to justify the stereotypes.

If you believe that blacks are dumber than anyone else (like the linked
article), then you have to support affirmative action, otherwise you are
setting up a society segregated by intelligence, which will also directly
correspond to skin color.

So blacks will always be at the bottom, and people of black skin will
automatically fall into that category with very little chance of getting out,
even if they are clever, as there will be many people justifying the opposite
stereotype.

Imagine all colleges had 5% less space for students. That's the only effect of
affirmative action. If you want to campaign for something, then campaign that
5% more students should be taken in - one for every student who got in as a
result of affirmative action. That's a win-win.

~~~
patio11
_Imagine all colleges had 5% less space for students. That's the only effect
of affirmative action._

It isn't, for the same reason that having one drinking fountain in twenty
marked Whites Only has salience far in excess of a 5% decrease in the supply
of drinking fountains.

~~~
jeb
So what you are saying is that discriminating in some way has a strong effect
on the perception of society in general?

Yes, there is this theoretical moral debate about what is right and what is
wrong, but the real effect of doing what you say is right, would result in
universities of only asians and whites, and the blacks mostly doing manual
labour.

Is THAT right?

~~~
patio11
Affirmative action matters for the most selective colleges in the United
States but very little for your average state school, where there is little to
no selection pressure. (It is the public policy of the United States that you
can get a tertiary degree -- and we will pay for it -- if you have a pulse.)
There are many doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, etc etc, who do not have
a degree from Harvard/MIT/etc. The hypothetical, exaggerated dystopian
universe in which the most selective ~25 institutions drop to ~2% black
doesn't resemble an Orwell novel.

~~~
hga
Affirmative action and the problems discovered by this study don't matter much
for MIT. MIT almost certainly wasn't part of the study, doesn't discriminate
against Asians, recruits white working class men from the Midwest when they're
underrepresented (and takes into account people's lack of opportunities in
general). It probably doesn't discriminate against Christians, those who were
in JROTC or farming organizations (I may have too little data to be sure about
these categories).

MIT's big advantages have to stem from it being a less intense version of
CalTech WRT math and physics. It simply can't afford to admit anyone who can't
do the work (and there's a _lot_ of self-selection in the applicant pool),
doesn't do much with legacies (once again, they have to be able to do the
work) and doesn't take many students from "fancy prep schools". So it's got
lots of room for these students who are heavily discriminated against by the
other elite schools in the nation.

And for science, at least, CalTech and MIT really have to make a big
difference for those students. Everything in those fields depends on professor
recommendations (getting into a good grad school and what you do after getting
your Ph.D. and postdoc(s)). No matter how good you are, if your
recommendations are from professors the targets have never heard of, you're
... not in a good posture.

------
wdewind
Come on.

>Asians, unlike blacks and Hispanics, receive no boost in admissions.

Just not true.

>The admissions disadvantage was greatest for those in leadership positions in
these activities or those winning honors and awards. "Being an officer or
winning awards" for such career-oriented activities as junior ROTC, 4-H, or
Future Farmers of America, say Espenshade and Radford..."

SHOCK! Blue collar "career oriented" awards don't count for institutions who
primarily push people into white collar organizations?

This reads like it was written in 1992.

~~~
fanboy123
How is it not true? When ranking avg test scores & gpa the average asian and
white scores are usually higher than other ethnicities at top tier
universties.

I dont see why things like this always come up. That there is preference
exhibited during admissions is fact. It is by design. The real question is if
these practices have the desired effect on society.

