Scalia's Poorly Worded Comment Has Merit (1 Viewer)

[Denny Crane]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...s_poorly_worded_comment_has_merit_129030.html

Justin Antonin Scalia 's dreadfully worded comments last week during oral argument about racial preferences in college admissions understandably offended many people.

But what he was obviously trying to say made an important point that had nothing to do with racism -- a charge hurled at Scalia by people including Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, who once again wallowed in shameless demagoguery.

...

But the gist of Scalia's point is consistent with common sense. Why is anyone surprised at the idea (confirmed by data) that black students have a hard time thriving academically when brought by very large racial preferences into competition with classmates most of whom are far, far better prepared? (Small preferences, we think, create no such problem.)

Scalia's point is also supported by a large and growing body of social science studies by more than 20 respected scholars about the effects of large racial preferences.

More at the link. The author is a fellow at the left wing Brookings Institution.

 

[e_blazer]

I don't see any problem with the point the Scalia was trying, however inartfully, to make. As you say, it's only common sense that students who are allowed to get into top-tier universities through programs that give preference to minorities, rather than through achieving the same test scores and GPAs that other students admitted to the school had to earn, are unlikely to be as prepared for the academic environment as are their peers. That said, the question is what to do about it. I find that Scalia's inferred solution, that they go to lesser schools where the competition isn't as great, is a poor alternative to allowing them to attend the top-level institutions. The very point of programs that give preference to minorities in obtaining entrance to these schools is that they have a chance to learn from the best educators in the hope of helping to break cultural barriers and promoting a society where there is a more diverse population that has learned from the best teachers. It seems to me that that is still a worthy goal. Perhaps these universities could develop pre-enrollment programs to help students from these backgrounds gain more educational foundation prior to beginning their freshman year.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm torn on this one. It sure seems like if you put someone in the deep end and they can't swim, they're going to drown. On the other hand, it's likely that if even a small % of the students who get in based upon preferences do well, then we're moving the ball down the field a few yards at a time.

Sorry for the mixed metaphors.

 

[MARIS61]

Same BS the pc crowd throws at every Trump statement. Nit-picking the language used, not the validity of the statement.

Everyone knows what he really meant to say is generally true. Generally speaking, most generalizations are generally true, in a generic sense.

Scalia makes a valid point about one of the many ways Affirmative Action fails to promote racial equality and in fact prevents it by discriminating against caucasians and at the same time setting up minorities for failure due to harder curriculums, or worse yet failure in their chosen careers because they were awarded their degrees despite not learning the subjects adequately, then awarded their jobs despite having minimal or no qualifications. The performance failings of the US Government in it's day to day bureaucracy can be attributed mostly to Affirmative Action.

 

[MARIS61]

I don't see any problem with the point the Scalia was trying, however inartfully, to make. As you say, it's only common sense that students who are allowed to get into top-tier universities through programs that give preference to minorities, rather than through achieving the same test scores and GPAs that other students admitted to the school had to earn, are unlikely to be as prepared for the academic environment as are their peers. That said, the question is what to do about it. I find that Scalia's inferred solution, that they go to lesser schools where the competition isn't as great, is a poor alternative to allowing them to attend the top-level institutions. The very point of programs that give preference to minorities in obtaining entrance to these schools is that they have a chance to learn from the best educators in the hope of helping to break cultural barriers and promoting a society where there is a more diverse population that has learned from the best teachers. It seems to me that that is still a worthy goal. Perhaps these universities could develop pre-enrollment programs to help students from these backgrounds gain more educational foundation prior to beginning their freshman year.

Your assumed premise that "the best teachers" hold court solely or even mostly at "top-tier" universities is dubious at best. The best teachers are more likely to be found in less ego/financial-driven environments.

My best teacher was Dorothy Stafford, wife of Oregon Poet Laureate William Stafford. I was in 3rd grade and we discussed current events like President Kennedy's assassination and the subsequent escalation of the Vietnam War between our daily "Duck and Cover!" cold war drills in the hallway. She was a brilliant woman who inspired many young people to live great lives, mostly just by treating them like equals and not dumbing-it-down for them.

 

[MarAzul]

that has learned from the best teachers. It seems to me that that is still a worthy goal.

if even a small % of the students who get in based upon preferences do well, then we're moving the ball down the field a few yards

Over the past 150 years, a large percentage of the population of this country have immigrated to this country or are decedents of immigrates. I fail to see how it is equal protection in law, that one racial group, immigrate or not, can be given preferential treatment over the other races. Doesn't sound right. This welcoming thought did not make the cut, in what to inscribe on the statue of Liberty.

 

[Denny Crane]

Over the past 150 years, a large percentage of the population of this country have immigrated to this country or are decedents of immigrates. I fail to see how it is equal protection in law, that one racial group, immigrate or not, can be given preferential treatment over the other races. Doesn't sound right. This welcoming thought did not make the cut, in what inscribe on the statue of Liberty.

The math behind probability and statistics works against minorities if you simply put all names in a hat and pulled enough at random to fill the colleges.

Without AA, some whites weren't "discriminated against" (really?) and the schools were almost all white.

 

[blue32]

You should only get in if your test scores allow it period. Nothing about race should be on the application and nothing about race should include or exclude someone from getting into a school (should be all about the test scores). Will never happen, so onward we argue about how to make everyone equal in an unequal world.

 

[Denny Crane]

You should only get in if your test scores allow it period. Nothing about race should be on the application and nothing about race should include or exclude someone from getting into a school (should be all about the test scores). Will never happen, so onward we argue about how to make everyone equal in an unequal world.

Right. The thing is, if you have 100 people with perfect test scores, about 10 will be black, and the odds they get in if you choose only 10 of those is 10:1, and only one gets in, if at all.

 

[MARIS61]

The thing is, no similar system exists to give caucasians a similar chance at making the NBA as a player, and there are far more caucasians who want to be NBA players.

We should probably exempt caucasians from the skills tests and ignore their lack of size and quickness in order to see that racial balance is re-introduced into the game. All teams should be around 70% caucasian to reflect our society.

 

[Nikolokolus]

The thing with academic achievement and college preparedness is really more of a socio-economic problem than a problem of race. Unfortunately it's far more likely that a black person is going to come from a background of generational poverty.

I think the hope with AA was that if more poor black kids were given the opportunity to get into a college that eventually their collective successes would trickle down to their offspring (kids of college graduates being far more likely to go to college themselves than those with parents without a college education) but the harsh reality is that a college education just isn't what it used to be in terms of rigor and the kind of earning power it confers.

It's a helluva problem and the only way I think it ever gets any better in any meaningful way is for our primary and secondary education systems to dramatically improve (a large part of which also boils down to parental involvement and parents taking responsibility for their children's achievment, but that's not sexy or the way to get votes, so it'll probably never happen).

 

[blue32]

Right. The thing is, if you have 100 people with perfect test scores, about 10 will be black, and the odds they get in if you choose only 10 of those is 10:1, and only one gets in, if at all.

This is where they expand the selection process to things like volunteering work, extra ciricular activities completed/performed, maybe even a history check on the student to see if they've been involved in any criminal activity, etc. That SHOULD narrow it down enough to pick equal number of students covering whichever races applied. I assume anyway it could happen.

 

[MarAzul]

The math behind probability and statistics works against minorities if you simply put all names in a hat and pulled enough at random to fill the colleges.

Without AA, some whites weren't "discriminated against" (really?) and the schools were almost all white.

I don't think I understand what you said or see any logic. Perhaps humor?

 

[Denny Crane]

The thing with academic achievement and college preparedness is really more of a socio-economic problem than a problem of race. Unfortunately it's far more likely that a black person is going to come from a background of generational poverty.

I think the hope with AA was that if more poor black kids were given the opportunity to get into a college that eventually their collective successes would trickle down to their offspring (kids of college graduates being far more likely to go to college themselves than those with parents without a college education) but the harsh reality is that a college education just isn't what it used to be in terms of rigor and the kind of earning power it confers.

It's a helluva problem and the only way I think it ever gets any better in any meaningful way is for our primary and secondary education systems to dramatically improve (a large part of which also boils down to parental involvement and parents taking responsibility for their children's achievment, but that's not sexy or the way to get votes, so it'll probably never happen).

I couldn't have said it better.

I used the moving the ball down the field a few yards at a time metaphor. But... yeah.

 

[MarAzul]

the harsh reality is that a college education just isn't what it used to be in terms of rigor and the kind of earning power it confers.

Perhaps value of college education has depreciated, the result of programs with unintended consequences, and more of the same only serves to reduce the benchmark. The sorting process will be done at some point no matter what liberal programs are introduced, no doubt with unintended consequences.

 

[Nikolokolus]

The "conservative" approach hasn't done shit for poor people either, so its not like its just some "liberal" failure.

 

[MarAzul]

so its not like its just some "liberal" failure

Oh I think it is. I can't think of any other, can you? My experience suggests, at least to me, that we should not alway setup competition for the same space. Recognition of aptitude and complimentary aptitudes allows for team strength. Far better results can be had for many rather than filtering by direct competition only.

 

[riverman]

The thing with academic achievement and college preparedness is really more of a socio-economic problem than a problem of race. Unfortunately it's far more likely that a black person is going to come from a background of generational poverty.

I think the hope with AA was that if more poor black kids were given the opportunity to get into a college that eventually their collective successes would trickle down to their offspring (kids of college graduates being far more likely to go to college themselves than those with parents without a college education) but the harsh reality is that a college education just isn't what it used to be in terms of rigor and the kind of earning power it confers.

It's a helluva problem and the only way I think it ever gets any better in any meaningful way is for our primary and secondary education systems to dramatically improve (a large part of which also boils down to parental involvement and parents taking responsibility for their children's achievment, but that's not sexy or the way to get votes, so it'll probably never happen).

Well said. I completely agree with this.

 

[MarAzul]

Well said. I completely agree with this.

It seems you and Denny both agree with Nik, but he recognizes it isn't working. So, what is to agree with?

 

[MARIS61]

The "conservative" approach hasn't done shit for poor people either, so its not like its just some "liberal" failure.

Affirmative Action ONLY harms poor people. It's victims are the labor class, the lower middle-class and the sporadically employed. Hard-working, qualified, but forever blacklisted because they are Caucasian.

 

[Denny Crane]

It seems you and Denny both agree with Nik, but he recognizes it isn't working. So, what is to agree with?

That even if this generation doesn't get ideal educational results, they do learn enough and pass on to the next. It seems like there has been progress. I assume that 30 years ago, fewer blacks were graduating from the selective schools with high grades.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Affirmative Action ONLY harms poor people. It's victims are the labor class, the lower middle-class and the sporadically employed. Hard-working, qualified, but forever blacklisted because they are Caucasian.

God only knows how I managed to get all the way through grad school and find a job in my field of choice with me being on that "blacklist." It's a fucking Festivus miracle!

 

[riverman]

It seems you and Denny both agree with Nik, but he recognizes it isn't working. So, what is to agree with?

his post...particularly parental involvement in successful education of children

 

[MarAzul]

Do I detect some uncommonly charitable thinking people here? This AA is ok because it doesn't really effect me or my children. If it does some good, then the few whites kids that were pushed aside is ok since it is for the greater good. The perceived greater good out weights the occasional unequal protection in law that a few white kids must endure. (Or Asian)
Does this sound like a fine welcome to engrave on the statue of Liberty?

Should the Navy be required to do this also? The requirements for FC people, those that run the combat weapons systems, is so high, you need to be Mensa ready to become a candidate in the field. Is that fair? Or just reality?

 

[Denny Crane]

AA affects the same number of people as not having AA would. Actually, not having AA might hurt generations of people.

 

[riverman]

Personally my kids have all grown up but achieved their success through hard work. My son went on academic scholarship to the university and of the 6 friends that went their together..he's the only one who graduated, the rest dropped out. Four of the five other guys were all caucasian and didn't have the grades for scholarships...basically went to college to party, two had to get married after a year there.. Anybody can go to a community college and chip away at a degree while holding a job. In my experience affirmative action hasn't stopped anyone who wants an education from getting one...unwanted pregnancies however ..have

 

[MarAzul]

To float one high, you must push one down unless of course they do not compete for the the same space. But they do compete for the same space. One goes to Stanford, one does not. If good comes from going to Stanford, then one receives the good and the other does not. It must feel good to someone else (in power) to alter the natural selection, because it is illogical and unfair to one while charitable to the other.

 

[MarAzul]

Personally my kids

Yeah it does not affect most of us most of the time. But it did affect my daughter, Valdictorian of her class, 4.0 student, super high SAT. Denied entry to Stanford for the purpose of diversity.
It also just so happens that I was doing the Company College recruiting (one of several) when her class graduated, and Stanford was one of my schools. She graduated from Berkley, 3.9+
so all was well. I interview one Black kid in the class at Stanford, 3.2 GPA which just put him in over the bar need to hire the minority student. 3.7 was required of the whited kids. However,
he sort of laughed at the offer, I have no idea what he did after this. My daughter went to work with IBM although I had nothing to do with this.

I always wondered what the hell difference it made to that kid (or which ever it was) getting her bumped from Stanford to Berkley, instead of him going to Berkley? I will never know,
but the question seems to me to be valid and it also seems to be just screwing around for the purpose of someone feeling like there are doing some good. I think not, although it sure as hell saved me some money. The price difference was huge.