University of Texas Supreme Court case

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

most of the time the "minority" will get in over the white person because as DeltaBetaBaby so ignorantly pointed out "You know what she DOES get for being born white? White privilege. Her entire life."

1. Why is minority in quotes?
2. I'm not a fan of discrimination, but you have to be naive if you think that what DBB said is inaccurate.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by shirley1929

I'm curious as to how the other academically demanding/strict admissions state schools handle this (I'm thinking UVa, Michigan, etc...etc...)? Clearly this isn't an issue that is unique to UT/A&M?

I think it is unique because of the 10% rule. However, after the Supreme Court case in 2003, the state of Michigan passed a ballot proposal (in 2006) stating that race cannot be a consideration for admissions to any state university.

I was flabbergasted when I heard about the 10% rule. Many kids in our top 10% do not get into Michigan. There would not be room for them all. Michigan is more selective than the top 10% for the average public school. Test scores are important as are extra-curricular activities and essays.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

You get two people who have equal merits, grades, letters of rec, etc... most of the time the "minority" will get in over the white person because as DeltaBetaBaby so ignorantly pointed out "You know what she DOES get for being born white? White privilege. Her entire life."

Oh, dear, please don't tell me you think white privilege is a myth. Bless your heart.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Oh, dear, please don't tell me you think white privilege is a myth. Bless your heart.

Discriminating against better qualified applicants in university admissions does not count as getsies backsies for a DWB or workplace discrimination or some other white privilege related happening.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Discriminating against better qualified applicants in university admissions does not count as getsies backsies for a DWB or workplace discrimination or some other white privilege related happening.

Every university has their own definition of "qualified." A university whose sports teams have been utter shit and has a mortgage on a huge football stadium may choose to admit students who can't spell their own name but who can make 5 touchdowns per game. Different strokes for different folks. Unless they spell out that highest grades = highest possibility of admission, I can't see where anyone could bitch about it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Every university has their own definition of "qualified." A university whose sports teams have been utter shit and has a mortgage on a huge football stadium may choose to admit students who can't spell their own name but who can make 5 touchdowns per game. Different strokes for different folks. Unless they spell out that highest grades = highest possibility of admission, I can't see where anyone could bitch about it.

This whole thread is about what different folks think "qualified" means. Of course universities get the final say, well, at least except when a court orders otherwise.

[Munchkin03]

If a school like UT limits their admission to only the top 10% (or, honestly, 7-9%) of applicants, how will they admit legacies or athletes, both groups whose GPA and SAT scores are lower than the rest of their class? This applies for state and private schools.

While a lawsuit against every AA program is bound to happen, I'm not sure Abigail Fisher is the best test case. While she may have been an average student, she was mediocre for the case of getting into one of the most competitive public universities.

When Miss Fisher was asked about exactly what it is she's missed out on by not attending UT, this was her reply:

"The only thing I missed out on was my post-graduation years," she said. "Just being in a network of U.T. graduates would have been a really nice thing to be in. And I probably would have gotten a better job offer had I gone to U.T."

Ironically, she's totally Googlable as the plaintiff in this case. Won't this hurt her chances in the job market in the long run? She's employed now, but as someone who just went through the job search, I can tell you that memories are long--especially when Google is involved. Fortunately, most of my results were related to races and charity events, not lawsuits that resulted from my not getting my way! Jennifer Gratz, the plaintiff in the Michigan case, has made a career out of being a mediocre whiner--maybe, if this case goes through, Abigail Fisher can do the same thing!

Also, couldn't she have transferred to UT, if going was so important to her? Or was this lawsuit more about one gigantic whine?

I will object to one item: "The university said the Top Ten program was a blunt instrument and that classes in many subjects have few or no minority students."

That has nothing to do with the Top Ten program, and more to do with the fact that some subjects simply do not attract students of underrepresented groups. My profession is one of them--in four years of undergrad and two years of grad school, I was always one of the only, if not THE only, non-Asian minority in architecture classes. Even at HBCUs, architecture programs are majority white or Asian.

Florida eliminated AA years ago, and they've done a good job of providing outreach programs to underrepresented minorities (which in Florida is black and Asian) and kids in rural areas of the state, letting them know as soon as Freshman year what they need to do in order to get into the flagship universities. Maybe this is something that Texas could expand...?

[ASUADPi]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Oh, dear, please don't tell me you think white privilege is a myth. Bless your heart.

I guess according to you because I'm white I've had everything handed to me on a silver platter huh? Get a better argument sweetheart.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I think it is unique because of the 10% rule. However, after the Supreme Court case in 2003, the state of Michigan passed a ballot proposal (in 2006) stating that race cannot be a consideration for admissions to any state university.

I was flabbergasted when I heard about the 10% rule. Many kids in our top 10% do not get into Michigan. There would not be room for them all. Michigan is more selective than the top 10% for the average public school. Test scores are important as are extra-curricular activities and essays.

This 10% thing is relatively new, and it's come to pass already that it will be the top 8%, then 9%, and then 7% in a few years. Michigan's just also a lot more competitive in terms of admission and has been for a long time, and its student body is smaller than that of UT.

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

I can say that I support her lawsuit. I say this because I have been a victim of reverse discrimination. I applied for a scholarship while in college and I was told to not even bother turning the application in because I wasn't black or hispanic. Somehow because of my white skin it was assumed that I had money growing off a tree in my backyard and that I didn't need the scholarship. I was pissed.

Really? Reverse discrimination? Are you going to go there? Please don't be so boring.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

1. Why is minority in quotes?

I think what she is trying to say is that in Arizona, Hispanics are often far from being a minority in some situations, even though the rest of the country might see them that way.

Is UT wholly state-owned or is it just state-affiliated?