US Supreme Court to hear Texas race case

[punisher73]

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_new...iggest-race-case-in-six-years?lite&ocid=msnhp

She was not entitled to automatic admission under Texas’ "top 10 percent rule," which by law requires the university to admit all in-state high school seniors who rank academically in the top 10 percent of their classes.
Instead, Fisher competed for admission with others who weren’t in the top 10 percent of their graduating class. And though her academic credentials were superior to some minority applicants who were admitted to the University of Texas, Fisher was not.

Thoughts on this in leiu of how the SC voted in regards to University of Michigan?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I think the entire situation is extremely complicated and can be legitimately seen from a variety of viewpoints. I acknowledge the right of a university to use race or ethnicity as a factor in determining admissions. I also wonder what happens when people agitating for the same 'rights' for gay and transgendered people demand to be given preference in order to establish a 'diverse' student population. Does that mean that prospective students will be required to reveal their sexual preferences when applying? No, I am not exaggerating, it is apparently happening in California:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...judges-asked-to-say-if-they-are-gay/?page=all

And what then? What comes after that? Do we get to the point where we demand that student populations must have a certain population of the obese? And aren't we being unfair to the unintelligent? Should we not admit high-school dropouts as well, what about their right to opportunity?

In cases where race is being used to discriminate against people, for example in hiring practices, I understand why there are laws to attempt to overcome that (no matter how poorly they may work). I may not agree, but I at least understand. In cases where an environment is supposed to be a true meritocracy or the closest thing we have to one (university), and where admission does not require in-person interviews, photos, or other means of establishing the race of the applicant, I do not quite grasp why it is necessary to have quotas. I acknowledge that it is a difficult issue with many legitimate points of view, but I just don't see it myself.

 

[cdunn]

I think the entire situation is extremely complicated and can be legitimately seen from a variety of viewpoints. I acknowledge the right of a university to use race or ethnicity as a factor in determining admissions. I also wonder what happens when people agitating for the same 'rights' for gay and transgendered people demand to be given preference in order to establish a 'diverse' student population. Does that mean that prospective students will be required to reveal their sexual preferences when applying? No, I am not exaggerating, it is apparently happening in California:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...judges-asked-to-say-if-they-are-gay/?page=all

And what then? What comes after that? Do we get to the point where we demand that student populations must have a certain population of the obese? And aren't we being unfair to the unintelligent? Should we not admit high-school dropouts as well, what about their right to opportunity?

In cases where race is being used to discriminate against people, for example in hiring practices, I understand why there are laws to attempt to overcome that (no matter how poorly they may work). I may not agree, but I at least understand. In cases where an environment is supposed to be a true meritocracy or the closest thing we have to one (university), and where admission does not require in-person interviews, photos, or other means of establishing the race of the applicant, I do not quite grasp why it is necessary to have quotas. I acknowledge that it is a difficult issue with many legitimate points of view, but I just don't see it myself.

U of Texas denies pure quotas - which is probably correct. There is the accusation that they have chosen those with an inferior academic record for admission on the basis of race. We do not know what the entirety of the factors that went into the decison were.

It is extremely unfortunate, but due to the complex interaction of monority culture, poverty, and the disparate qualities found within the primary/secondary school system, the kind of merit that we wish to come forth and claim the front ranks of the university education system does not always correspond to the simple numbers that get puked out of the SAT or ACT, a high school GPA, or a list of extra-curricular activities, especially now that parents have learned that the system appears to be gameable. Much of what she claims to be a good record may well have been cheapened by shallowness - we don't know. These must be accounted for; and unfortunately, in this country, high melatonin in the skin correlates well to poverty and the concomittant reduction in educational opportunity and quality; yet these same students may be highly intelligent and have single passions that ran deep enough to pursue despite difficulty. We also have the school's consideration of race, which is claimed to be to insure not a given quota, but that all students have the opportunity to be exposed to students from other backgrounds in a meaningful fashion, which is of its own proven educational benefit; an echo chamber is of little use. This also plays a factor in admissions.

In any case, UT has the whole thing here, if anyone wants to dig.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

U of Texas denies pure quotas - which is probably correct. There is the accusation that they have chosen those with an inferior academic record for admission on the basis of race. We do not know what the entirety of the factors that went into the decison were.

It is extremely unfortunate, but due to the complex interaction of monority culture, poverty, and the disparate qualities found within the primary/secondary school system, the kind of merit that we wish to come forth and claim the front ranks of the university education system does not always correspond to the simple numbers that get puked out of the SAT or ACT, a high school GPA, or a list of extra-curricular activities, especially now that parents have learned that the system appears to be gameable. Much of what she claims to be a good record may well have been cheapened by shallowness - we don't know. These must be accounted for; and unfortunately, in this country, high melatonin in the skin correlates well to poverty and the concomittant reduction in educational opportunity and quality; yet these same students may be highly intelligent and have single passions that ran deep enough to pursue despite difficulty. We also have the school's consideration of race, which is claimed to be to insure not a given quota, but that all students have the opportunity to be exposed to students from other backgrounds in a meaningful fashion, which is of its own proven educational benefit; an echo chamber is of little use. This also plays a factor in admissions.

In any case, UT has the whole thing here, if anyone wants to dig.

I agree with you, and unfortunately, this is what we often end up dealing with when we get to the part of social engineering where we try to put theory into practice. It can be terribly messy and not at all easy to predict outcomes.

I am reminded a great deal of the current issues in climate science where some of those who feel that we humans have destroyed the climate have suggested specific remedies which include not just curtailing the output of dangerous emissions, but the deliberate introduction of other sorts of deliberate emissions to 'fix' the problem. Holy Cow, we don't even know for sure what broke and how to fix it, but we're just going to start throwing stuff into the atmosphere at random and hope we don't finish the job of killing ourselves? Brilliant? This is very much the same. We have a problem with opportunity being unequal. Solution? A hammer! Yeah, that fixes it. Uh, not.