How do you measure that?

Well, since we are pointing out WRONG statements, a study done from Loyola proved otherwise. The UCLA study was considered "lacking", since it did not provide an adequate operational definition of what racial diversity meant.

And people do bring up diversity when arguing their viewpoint in support of affirmative active. Just recently Michagen LS did.

I'd trust the reputation of the study at UCLA over the one at Loyola.

-Rudey
--But you can trust whatever you want.

LOL. :D Ok... :cool:

My opinion is that it's intangible. You can't measure it. If I took a survey that asked, "Are you a liberal because of your associations with black people and Hispanics?" I'd say no, obviously. But the fact of the matter is that my opinions on race and affirmative action would be way different if I'd gone to a high school that was 90% white, if I hadn't taken an ethnic studies class in high school where I discussed race and religion daily, if my classes weren't taught by white teachers, if I'd lived in a town that was primarily conservative, and if I hadn't gone to a university where race issues are so prevalent.

How many of us can say we'd be exactly the same people as we are if we'd only been exposed to people exactly like ourselves? (Or if you were primarily surrounded by people who were a lot like you, think of how different you'd be if you hadn't.) I don't think anybody can say that. And that's why diversity (not just race but diversity of EVERYTHING) is important.

I think that at some schools (and I'm basing this off of my experience at Wisconsin) people get so bent out of shape about the idea of affirmative action that they shut their minds off to any new ideas about race. There are plenty of people who think that the only reason people of color are at their school is because they're not white . . . and they determine that because of that, the minorities are not as smart as them and not worthy of listening to. That is one failing of affirmative action, IMO, but it's not in the process, it's in the people.

Are you saying that you would not have had the ability to make decisions that overlook the race of others without these external influences?

Almost everything is tangible and can be measured. Even the meaning of life.

-Rudey
--I used to think the same way about Rudey Jr. You can't measure this bad boy, but one day they made a measuring tape capable of measuring it.

I would hope that colleges aren't promising things to minority applicants hoping they will accept just to help them achieve their "diversity goals." This is another case where I think retention rates speak far higher than acceptance rates. (i.e., don't trumpet your 50% increase in minority enrollment if only 5% of that increase actually graduates)

I am a product of Affirmative Action... Currently I get paid from a minority based fellowship from the National Institutes of Health for underrepresented minorities in molecular biology...

I am a case of taking advantage of an opportunity that has presented itself. I may never get another opportunity like this again. And in 3 years I will apply for other funds from various departments of the NIH. I will be under just the same amount of scrutiny as all the other applicants and will be required to have similar credentials as anyone else...

Regardless how I got here, I am still held accountable for all that I do in my field just as much as anyone else would be....

I'm saying that because of these external influences, I grew to understand cultures other than my own better.

Almost every opinion that you have is a result of some sort of external influence -- your parents, your friends, your teachers, the people around you, the media, the government, the church. For example, if you're surrounded by people who are conservative, you're much more likely to be conservative than you are to be liberal, because conservativism is the culture you understand best. If you don't understand a culture, it's unlikely you're going to support it.

And Rudey, if the meaning of life is tangible, I want to know what it is. ;)

I have the survey somewhere and the statistical analysis on my computer in ny. It was my westinghouse project.

-Rudey
--I'm so cool...look at me talk about my westinghouse. Yeah!!!

Nerd.

I definately agree with this. At my first university, it wasn't very diversivied. Since I've transferred however, I've met so many different people from so many different backgrounds/ethnicities/places, etc., that I am just amazed on how much I've learned from them since I've moved.

Understanding the culture of another and believing that others should receive preferential treatment based on factors other than ability or achievement seem to be two separate issues. Unless you are saying, that because of your “understanding” you have concluded that certain groups need preferential treatment in order to compete.

That's exactly what I thought of (wage gap--which is not only gender based, but race based as weel BTW) when I started reading the article. Even when things like education and experience are the same, white males tend to make more than any other group. (((Wondering if the cookies were any good)))