or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › The Grill Room › New California Policies Cutting Qualified Students from CA Schools
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New California Policies Cutting Qualified Students from CA Schools - Page 2

post #19 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post

You only brought up the press release that says it will accept more applicants based upon factors other than the SAT tests. I will only address this issue in this post as there are many other aspects of the policy that is steering the education at these schools in the wrong direction as well.

These tests are where many American Asians are strong, this is a fact. So, the new policy is specifically targeting American Asians. I am not sure how it will affect foreign born Asians since I don't have any of the admission data.

Sports will gain a boost. Your quote states that "qualified applicants" who would not do well in these standardized tests, but would otherwise fit well at the UC schools would also benefit. Who are they? Generally, not Asians, but possibly other minorities?

My guess is that applicants from abroad will also benefit from this. Non US applicants are also wealthier, and will pay full price for tuition and housing. Their weakness? More than likely the Verbal SAT scores which they are scrapping.

Instead of having a generally higher level of education, the school will depend upon the higher level of the fewer local applicants who exceed the new bar of purely academic acceptance to keep the standards higher. They will get tuition from richer less qualified foreign applicants. They will recruit much better athletes with not so great academic standards.

Who wins? The school. Is it fair? IDK, that's why I am posing this question to you guys to get a better feel.

I would like to know how everyone feels about this.
I simply quoted statements about the policy from the article that YOU linked. And based only on that article, the policy seems completely fair to me because it will include more people in the application process without excluding anybody. How could you argue otherwise?

I'm also likely always going to be for policies that lean less on standardized tests. They are a poor judge of talent, IMO. They show you who is good at prepping for and taking tests, not necessarily one who is most proficient in the material.

 

 

Sorry, but it's definitely not some outrageous conspiracy thinking. It's pretty obvious to me that this act is targeting Asian Americans. Most of them have adapted to the current rules and take AP classes and tutoring in order to meet the current University requirements.

 

One could argue that the current policy is "unfair" to other minorities, foreign nationals or anyone not capable of holding a 4.5 GPA through 4 years of high school.

 

One could also argue that this will stop the Asian parent from overworking their child 8 hours a day studying to meet the requirements.

 

 

 

 

BTW, my family is not affected by this policy in any way. We could get in by other outdated government policies if we played that card. I don't let my kid know, and let my wife manage their education, Asian style. :whistle: 

post #20 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS256 View Post
 
 
. . .I would like to know how everyone feels about this.

 



You mean you guys in California pass up "better athletes" in favor of better students? a2_wink.gif


That's our current policy, but will change when this policy is in effect.

 

And here I was too naive to think a University was intended to educate people. :-$ 

post #21 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post

And here I was too naive to think a University was intended to educate people. f3_laugh.gif  

Depends on the university. Education is not - and never will be - the primary aim of the UC system, or any other R1 school. Yes, people get educated there, but teaching - especially of undergraduates - is not the main goal.
post #22 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shindig View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post

And here I was too naive to think a University was intended to educate people. f3_laugh.gif  

Depends on the university. Education is not - and never will be - the primary aim of the UC system, or any other R1 school. Yes, people get educated there, but teaching - especially of undergraduates - is not the main goal.

 

I have a strange feeling you are a affiliated with Harvey Mudd or Pomona College? :smartass:

 

My son really likes Harvey Mudd. Let's see how his grades pan out after junior year, and if his senior science fair project impresses some recruiters.

 

Sorry about the off topic.

post #23 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post

I have a strange feeling you are a affiliated with Harvey Mudd or Pomona College? z5_smartass.gif

My son really likes Harvey Mudd. Let's see how his grades pan out after junior year, and if his senior science fair project impresses some recruiters.

Sorry about the off topic.

I'm not. Best of luck to your son just the same. In case my advice elsewhere in the thread -- whether for someone who may or may not be affected by the new policies - needs this, I'll state that I have been affiliated with four different R1s in my time, but never a SLAC.
post #24 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

 

Sorry, but it's definitely not some outrageous conspiracy thinking. It's pretty obvious to me that this act is targeting Asian Americans.

To me, this statement is a contradiction.  It is a change in policy, and it is your opinion that that policy will affect Asians the most.  You are jumping to the conclusion that because you believe the policy happens to affect one group more than any others, that it is specifically "targeting" that group.  

 

I'm still not understanding exactly how it will affect Asians either.  They've stopped requiring an extra test (that no other University system requires) to be eligible.  Nowhere does it say that they wouldn't still give consideration to people who take that extra test, or for that matter, extra consideration to people who take that test.  It just says you won't be required to take it anymore.

 

And, knowing the ridiculous business that standardized tests have become, and more specifically, standardized test prep, I think that is a good thing.

 

The article also doesn't say anything about preferential treatment for any lesser qualified students either.

 

I mean, if I'm hiring a new employee, just because I encourage more people to submit resumes doesn't mean I'm hiring a crappier employee.  You know?

 

P.S.  There are plenty of good CSU's out there too ... UC's aren't the only decent schools in the state. ;)

post #25 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

 

Sorry, but it's definitely not some outrageous conspiracy thinking. It's pretty obvious to me that this act is targeting Asian Americans.

To me, this statement is a contradiction.  It is a change in policy, and it is your opinion that that policy will affect Asians the most.  You are jumping to the conclusion that because you believe the policy happens to affect one group more than any others, that it is specifically "targeting" that group.  

 

I'm still not understanding exactly how it will affect Asians either.  They've stopped requiring an extra test (that no other University system requires) to be eligible.  Nowhere does it say that they wouldn't still give consideration to people who take that extra test, or for that matter, extra consideration to people who take that test.  It just says you won't be required to take it anymore.

 

And, knowing the ridiculous business that standardized tests have become, and more specifically, standardized test prep, I think that is a good thing.

 

The article also doesn't say anything about preferential treatment for any lesser qualified students either.

 

I mean, if I'm hiring a new employee, just because I encourage more people to submit resumes doesn't mean I'm hiring a crappier employee.  You know?

 

P.S.  There are plenty of good CSU's out there too ... UC's aren't the only decent schools in the state. ;)

 

It's a contradiction only if you do not agree. ;-)

 

Many Asians go to tutoring centers to allow them to take 10 to 15 AP classes in high school and get near perfect scores on the SAT/ACT exams. This makes it nearly impossible for many other students who do not do the same thing.

 

A lot of people (like the ACLU and affiliates) complained about the fact that so many Asians were this highly qualified, stated their complaints to the UC system and asked them for changes. The irony is that Asians are a true minority in terms of population size, yet they are being penalized by this new policy for working so hard to get good grades and test scores.

 

A 3.0 GPA is not that hard to get. The difference between a 4.5 GPA student and a 3.0 student is the difference between someone who aced 3 years of honors level college classes and barely completing high school. It's a much wider gap than it looks.

 

Kind of like a 25 handicap versus a scratch. ***

 

It's big, and that's why people are complaining, and that's why most students with that high a GPA study 6 to 8 hours a day starting at 8 years old.

 

***For those that complain that this is not comparable, remember that these are 14 to 18 year old kids taking 3 years of honors level college classes. I'm sure many of us took 4 or 5 AP classes in high school. These kids are taking up to 15 of them starting freshman year of high school and scoring mostly 5's on the exams. They are also scoring higher than 97th percentile in SAT exams.

post #26 of 71

I have to disagree with the concept that this is designed to discriminate against Asian-Americans.  In fact, I disagree with the concept that this policy will discriminate against ANY Americans, since race is specifically excluded from consideration and the relaxation of standards opens the door to more equality with regard to admissions.     I obviously don't know you from Adam but after reading the link and your posts, I am led to presume you are either of Asian descent or some other member of your family is and you have fallen into the exact inflammatory trap the media set for you with the title and text of that article.

 

 

Off topic but this is something that grates on me.....  I am firmly of the opinion that as long as we pigeon hole people into specific groups (Asian-Americans, African-Americans, Irish-Americans, Native American, etc..) we will always be dealing with discrimination .   We are all descended from people who immigrated (either by choice or by force) to this country from someplace else.  Even those who call themselves "Native Americans" came here from Asia, as proven via DNA testing.  We continue to remain in this country because either we or our ancestors chose to stay here.  So if a person holds American citizenship and unless that individual holds dual citizenship, they are Americans and Americans only.  Period.  No hyphen or second word needed.   I fully support the concept of embracing our individual family heritages, learning the customs, languages, etc... of our ancestors and passing them on to our children.   It is a part of who we are and should remain so.  But until we drop our divided loyalties and simply become Americans, we will continue to be a divided nation.  Just my $.02  YMMV

post #27 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by teamroper60 View Post
 

I have to disagree with the concept that this is designed to discriminate against Asian-Americans.  In fact, I disagree with the concept that this policy will discriminate against ANY Americans, since race is specifically excluded from consideration and the relaxation of standards opens the door to more equality with regard to admissions.     I obviously don't know you from Adam but after reading the link and your posts, I am led to presume you are either of Asian descent or some other member of your family is and you have fallen into the exact inflammatory trap the media set for you with the title and text of that article.

 

 

Off topic but this is something that grates on me.....  I am firmly of the opinion that as long as we pigeon hole people into specific groups (Asian-Americans, African-Americans, Irish-Americans, Native American, etc..) we will always be dealing with discrimination .   We are all descended from people who immigrated (either by choice or by force) to this country from someplace else.  Even those who call themselves "Native Americans" came here from Asia, as proven via DNA testing.  We continue to remain in this country because either we or our ancestors chose to stay here.  So if a person holds American citizenship and unless that individual holds dual citizenship, they are Americans and Americans only.  Period.  No hyphen or second word needed.   I fully support the concept of embracing our individual family heritages, learning the customs, languages, etc... of our ancestors and passing them on to our children.   It is a part of who we are and should remain so.  But until we drop our divided loyalties and simply become Americans, we will continue to be a divided nation.  Just my $.02  YMMV

 

 

This is not off topic.

 

You're also right that it does not explicitly discriminate against Asians, but it is designed to allow less academically qualified people to replace qualified ones. This policy change affects only those that spent their lives preparing to go to these schools. This happened before in the late 90's, and a whole generation of hard working kids ended up going to other less prestigious schools.

 

I am wondering how it will pan out in a practical sense? Who is really going to benefit from this?

post #28 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

You're also right that it does not explicitly discriminate against Asians, but it is designed to allow less academically qualified people to replace qualified ones.

 

Why do you seem to assume that someone with a 3.0 GPA will be selected for admission over someone with a 4.3 GPA?

 

You're acting like making the process MORE open while simultaneously eliminating RACE from consideration will somehow be worse than when schools would for whatever reason admit fewer Asian children (and were able to because they knew their race).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

I am wondering how it will pan out in a practical sense? Who is really going to benefit from this?

 

Asian children, quite possibly, it seems.

post #29 of 71

What about the face to face interview though - I wonder if admissions asks interviewers for race info.

 

Also, Berkeley is 40% Asian (C, K, J, etc...) - is admissions matching the percentage of  Asians in California?

post #30 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post
 

What about the face to face interview though - I wonder if admissions asks interviewers for race info.

 

Also, Berkeley is 40% Asian (C, K, J, etc...) - is admissions matching the percentage of  Asians in California?

 

I think this is the main reason why the university is doing it. They want a wider variety of students. There is no direct evidence to support targeting race nor is my topic of discussion the conclusion I draw. I have been told this by many of my family and friends, but don't necessarily agree with their conclusion.

 

The fact remains that the purpose is to reduce the grade requirements so that less academically oriented students have a chance to get into the UC system, and they would displace some of the 40% Asian population. Which, by the way, is much higher than I realized.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

You're also right that it does not explicitly discriminate against Asians, but it is designed to allow less academically qualified people to replace qualified ones.

 

Why do you seem to assume that someone with a 3.0 GPA will be selected for admission over someone with a 4.3 GPA?

 

You're acting like making the process MORE open while simultaneously eliminating RACE from consideration will somehow be worse than when schools would for whatever reason admit fewer Asian children (and were able to because they knew their race).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

I am wondering how it will pan out in a practical sense? Who is really going to benefit from this?

 

Asian children, quite possibly, it seems.

 

Dropping the GPA requirement is going to allow coaches to recruit from a much wider variety of students. The purpose is to give them an opportunity to base the acceptance upon other skills without having to meet the current difficult to meet academic requirements. It will make the work of the admissions offices much harder, because they can't just take a bunch of numbers and give a simple accept/reject anymore.

 

The outrage from Asians is simply that one generation of kids that were raised to meet the current requirements will have to go to other schools. Some can afford it and it's no big deal because they most likely can get into the better private universities anyway. It's those that can't afford private schools who are going to suffer. There is also a rather large industry of tutoring centers and counseling/recruiting services that depend upon these kids desire to get into the flagship UC schools who will also suffer.

 

There are only so many people on the football and cheerleading teams (I might get roasted for this one :whistle:), so I doubt it will have a significant impact. I'm not sure how it will really pan out.

 

Maybe I should just focus on honing my kids' golf skills to scratch by the time they are seniors in high school? ;-) 

post #31 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

Dropping the GPA requirement is going to allow coaches to recruit from a much wider variety of students.

 

So? How many Asian kids are going to be passed up because someone gets an athletic scholarship for football or whatever?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

The purpose is to give them an opportunity to base the acceptance upon other skills without having to meet the current difficult to meet academic requirements.

 

Do you accept the idea that there are times when a well-rounded, hard-working 3.5 GPA student is desirable over a student with a 4.4 but very few non-academic extracurriculars?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

The outrage from Asians is simply that one generation of kids that were raised to meet the current requirements will have to go to other schools.

 

I see no evidence that they'll have to "go to other schools." If anything, it seems like the opposite: more Asian children will gain admission because they're not considering the "Race" checkbox anymore.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

There are only so many people on the football and cheerleading teams (I might get roasted for this one :whistle:), so I doubt it will have a significant impact. I'm not sure how it will really pan out.

 

That assumes that there were Asian children getting a lot of football or cheerleading scholarships before.

 

So if the coach replaces some black kid who had a 3.7 GPA with a kid who has a 3.3, how does that negatively affect the Asian child getting a 4.0+ who doesn't play football?

post #32 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

 

It's a contradiction only if you do not agree. ;-)

Well, technically, since all people who subscribe to a conspiracy theory think that they are right, and that, therefore, their belief is not a theory, then, yeah, you are right.  All who agree definitely do not believe it to be a contradiction.

 

But the facts are these:

 

A policy is changing.

The policy that has nothing to do with race.

One entire race is banding together saying that they are being unfairly targeted by a new policy that doesn't have anything to do with their race or any other.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

You're also right that it does not explicitly discriminate against Asians, but it is designed to allow less academically qualified people to replace qualified ones. This policy change affects only those that spent their lives preparing to go to these schools. This happened before in the late 90's, and a whole generation of hard working kids ended up going to other less prestigious schools.

There you go again.  Jumping to conclusions.  How do you know that less academically qualified students are going to replace more qualified ones?  You are just making an assumption.  Based on what?

 

Also, I'd make the argument that higher standardized test scores (and more standardized test scores) does not make you more qualified.  It just means that you took and prepped for more tests.

 

Nobody is being excluded.  Nobody is being targeted.  They are just widening the pool and giving more people a chance.  A slim one, maybe, but a chance nonetheless.

 

I think a decent analogy might be if the NFL were to change their policy to include high school graduates in the draft process.  Are solid college senior NFL prospects "targeted?"  Is anybody targeted?  Or is the NFL just opening up their options on the off chance that there might be a couple of golden nuggets hidden in there?

post #33 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

Dropping the GPA requirement is going to allow coaches to recruit from a much wider variety of students.

 

So? How many Asian kids are going to be passed up because someone gets an athletic scholarship for football or whatever?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

The purpose is to give them an opportunity to base the acceptance upon other skills without having to meet the current difficult to meet academic requirements.

 

Do you accept the idea that there are times when a well-rounded, hard-working 3.5 GPA student is desirable over a student with a 4.4 but very few non-academic extracurriculars?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

The outrage from Asians is simply that one generation of kids that were raised to meet the current requirements will have to go to other schools.

 

I see no evidence that they'll have to "go to other schools." If anything, it seems like the opposite: more Asian children will gain admission because they're not considering the "Race" checkbox anymore.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

There are only so many people on the football and cheerleading teams (I might get roasted for this one :whistle:), so I doubt it will have a significant impact. I'm not sure how it will really pan out.

 

That assumes that there were Asian children getting a lot of football or cheerleading scholarships before.

 

So if the coach replaces some black kid who had a 3.7 GPA with a kid who has a 3.3, how does that negatively affect the Asian child getting a 4.0+ who doesn't play football?

 

 

In general, I agree with what you stated. This is probably why the UC system is doing this to reduce the number of Asians and replace the student population with a more well rounded one.

 

In regard to the last item, I doubt that many Asians get "scholarships" for football and cheer-leading (well, maybe cheer-leading), but other people will with the new policy in effect. B-)

post #34 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

 

In general, I agree with what you stated. This is probably why the UC system is doing this to reduce the number of Asians and replace the student population with a more well rounded one.

That's not what he said.  Nobody except you has said this.

 

It seems to me, that they are doing this to simply allow for more applicants, some who very well may be "more rounded" and less adept at simply test prep.

 

Are there Asian kids out there who don't take all the test prep courses but who are still intelligent?  Are there non-Asians out there who do take all of the test prep courses but have very little other skills?

 

(The last two questions needn't be answered.  They are rhetorical.  The answers to both is certainly yes. :-P)

post #35 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

In general, I agree with what you stated. This is probably why the UC system is doing this to reduce the number of Asians and replace the student population with a more well rounded one.

 

I was going to say exactly this:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 

That's not what he said.  Nobody except you has said this.

post #36 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

 

It's a contradiction only if you do not agree. ;-)

Well, technically, since all people who subscribe to a conspiracy theory think that they are right, and that, therefore, their belief is not a theory, then, yeah, you are right.  All who agree definitely do not believe it to be a contradiction.

 

But the facts are these:

 

A policy is changing.

The policy that has nothing to do with race.

One entire race is banding together saying that they are being unfairly targeted by a new policy that doesn't have anything to do with their race or any other.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

You're also right that it does not explicitly discriminate against Asians, but it is designed to allow less academically qualified people to replace qualified ones. This policy change affects only those that spent their lives preparing to go to these schools. This happened before in the late 90's, and a whole generation of hard working kids ended up going to other less prestigious schools.

There you go again.  Jumping to conclusions.  How do you know that less academically qualified students are going to replace more qualified ones?  You are just making an assumption.  Based on what?

 

Also, I'd make the argument that higher standardized test scores (and more standardized test scores) does not make you more qualified.  It just means that you took and prepped for more tests.

 

Nobody is being excluded.  Nobody is being targeted.  They are just widening the pool and giving more people a chance.  A slim one, maybe, but a chance nonetheless.

 

I think a decent analogy might be if the NFL were to change their policy to include high school graduates in the draft process.  Are solid college senior NFL prospects "targeted?"  Is anybody targeted?  Or is the NFL just opening up their options on the off chance that there might be a couple of golden nuggets hidden in there?

 

The bottom line is that the purpose of this new policy is designed to reduce the population of 4.5 GPA types with more "well rounded" ones. Taking race completely out of the equation.

 

I did not define "qualified ones" very carefully, and it was completely unintentional. Sorry if I offended you. I meant it only in an academic sense.

 

Believe it or not, many Asians with 4.5 GPA are doing many extra-curricular activities. They do things like Art, Music, Golf. . .to a pretty high level. Every thing is competitive. "You need to get to level 8 or 10 in piano", or violin, or "become a scratch player". Whatever has a metric for achievement, and the parents will help them make their goal. Anything you can measure, the highest level is their goal. However, not wanting to stir up any racial comments, but there are just not that many Asians capable of playing a defensive line. So, it's really unlikely that most Asians will focus on football.

 

Who knows? It might actually be better for the school, but the fact remains that some Asian families will suffer the consequences.

 

BTW, your NFL football analogy is pretty much right on target. Less college students will be recruited, because some high school students are being recruited. It's a simple fact.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Grill Room
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › The Grill Room › New California Policies Cutting Qualified Students from CA Schools