|
What constitutes a fair UC admissions policy?
AUDIENCE COMMENTS:
RIGHT ON TO WARD CONNERLY!! THE REAL REASON MINORITY
ENROLLMENTS ARE DOWN @UC SYSTEMS IS DUE TO THE FACT THATTHESE STUDENTS JUST
CAN'T CUT THE MUSTARD!!
mich2501@aol.com
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 22:38 |
I don't think it's right for people to worry so much
about race and socioeconomics... since when was diversity defined by racial
distributions? Diversity is based on individuality, from their background. Just
as Asian Americans are different between groups, people are different,
regardless of race. I think that's what is important. Drops in minority numbers
doesn't necessarily mean that diversity is being lost. And how can people say
that they are a result of 209? I myself am a Berkeley Student, and I understand
the chaos that is going on. I understand the formation of opinion. And I am
also frustrated. But it takes time for things to change. What infuriates me
most is the lawsuit for discrimination in admission. To be bitter is not the
solution, to dwel on the issue... what people seem to forget is that others
were denied admission, white or otherwise. Things happen. People shouldn't see
discrimination everywhere, and sometimes, people just don't succeed.
john liu
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 22:47 |
I also think the person above is misguided...
affirmative action does not let unqualified students in... even AA admits need
to meet minimum requirements.
john liu
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 22:53 |
What can a normal person do to improve the public
school system?
Aldero Berronini
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 23:12 |
I want to go to Berkeley, but it seems like there
won't be many students from my community left there, so it makes me wonder if
I'll really be welcome, you know, feel like it's my school too. I think
education is about learning from your classmates as well as your
teachers.
Hang N.
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 23:18 |
I recognize that the Governor's 4% plan is not an
adequate solution to the problems of inequality addressed in your program this
evening. Yet, I do believe it is a step in the right direction. It is unlikely
that affirmative action programs will be reinstituted in California. Given
that, it is necessary to begin finding some creative solutions to address the
immediate damage done to diversity in college admissions that has come about as
a result of the elimination of affirmative action. However, much more is
needed. We need to address the economic disparity in our school system and
society. That is something that neither affirmative action nor the 4% plan
addresses. Your program helped show the economic disparity and inequality in
public education. Hopefully, it will lead to a more honest and less shrill
public debate that will address the issues underlying the affimative action
controversy. Thanks.
Jim Smith
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 23:25 |
I am a senior this year at an upper middle class
public high school in the east bay. I do not think race should have anything to
do with admission to any public school. If you are not smart enough to get in,
but they accept you anyway just becasue your skin is a certain color, you are
being set up to be unsuccessful in college. It doesn't do any good to go to
Berkeley if you can't pass their classes no matter what color you are. I agree
with Gov. Davis' 4% plan. I know it won't affect the diversity of the campus'
too much, but it will provide UC spots to those who attned schools in areas
that normally do not produce strong students.
Jarad Bernstein
Tuesday, Mar. 23 1999 at 23:55 |
I really resent the proposition that diversity has
anything to do with ethnicity. When everyone makes the claim that diversity is
suffering because of a lack of demographic representation, they are being
racist by assigning a quality to people based on their race. The notion that
someone's race adds anything to the quality of education is totally based on
emotion and devoid of logic. Diversity occurs when students bring different
life experiences to discussions on campus and it would be impossible to select
a group of students that were not diverse in every important way. The reality
of race-based admissions policies on campuses is that the minority students who
are accepted to schools like UCLA & Berkeley all band together and stay in
their own groups. The supposed environment of learning never really is achieved
because of the racial schisms that are created when the students fully
understand that some of their classmates were subjected to different standards.
Remember when people argue for diversity that it is merely a code word for
color.
Frank
Wednesday, Mar. 24 1999 at 00:01 |
Race-Blindness on the UC app should not even be in
question. It's unethical to have the criterium of skin-color. What does need to
be given some consideration is the financial conditions and familial conditions
of the student in question. Only then can you make a judgement between two
otherwise identical academic performers. If you make the grade and are
black/white/latino/asian/venusian, good for you. There should be no racial
bias. If there's only one spot available, then it becomes a roulette table if
they are are identical except for race. However, if anyone of them is in fact
not indentical and perhaps in poorer shape financially, then he/she should be
admitted. It doesn't matter what race you are, even though the underprivileged
communities are usually composed of certain racial minorities. Eugene Chan
ceugene@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Eugene Chan
Wednesday, Mar. 24 1999 at 00:25 |
um...the playing fields of getting into college must
not start when we're 14 and up..by then the bulk of what we've learned in
school and what counts in how we can suceed is already deeply embedded in ones
mind. it's unfair to base things on race but, so many things that are deep in
the roots of us amercians, in our culture, in our opinions, in the basic way we
interact with one another that it all depends on race..either directly or
indirectly. so, AA is like a pacififer over the whole problem but, no AA is
just like letting a wet and hungry baby cry and suffer because, that child is
not capable of doing what it needs to do not because it's insuffcient but,
because the " playing fields " are not leveled. how do we fix a
problem that started when this country was first formed? how do we make race
not count? i want to know because my education, the sucess in my education
depends on my college experience....i'm a female, black, good student but, in a
school that's full of diversity yet, it's easy to slip through the cracks....we
must help one another not for personal gain or superity but, because race
problems will never go away, because we can't live in isolation of one another
or hate, and because..didn't your parents teach ya'll right? i'm hoping to do a
similar project at berkeley high..because this upsets me so much.i am smart i
am wonderful but, it's an eceltic intelligence due to my equal racial
surroundings, my experinces, my education, and because of the passion and love
of unity that i am lucky to have come across..i dunno. life is so unfair, i
think and it's not even my fault..my people were dragged over here, by people
who are long dead yet, that menatlity and their thouhts still effect me
everyday of my life...it's sick how i must pay the dues of our forefathers or
what not..how do we get past all this. how do we straiten this stuff up for us
in the present and them in the future..how do we get past our past...? it makes
me cry.
ebonee
Thursday, Mar. 25 1999 at 01:12 |
I understand and agree that entrance to a university
should not be based on color. However, the reality is that it is a combination
of color and socio-economics that block minority entrance to good universities.
When I say minority, I mean poor white people as well as ethnic minorities of
all income levels. Unfortunately, minorites have less access to good
highschools and have even less access to seminars and workshops that teach you
how to take tests like the SAT. Without this help, they are bound to get lower
scores. In addition, people with lower incomes and people of color usually come
from parents who are laborers who have little (maybe they finished highschool)
or no education (maybe they didn't get past elementary). These children are
unable to seek their parents help with school work because their parents either
do not know how to do it or they are just unavailable because they are trying
to make ends meet. Whereas children of parents who are economically well off
(usually anglo) usually come from a family with a history of being well
educated. If their parents are unavailable to help them or they do not know the
material they can always just pay a tutor. My point is that affirmative action
was able to somewhat level the playing ground for all people. I know that some
people believe that stupid people where getting into good schools because of
affirmative action. However, even with affirmative action students had to show
initiative and a desire to succeed in school. No one who knows what it is like
to live without money is thinking of going to school and then just flunking
out, especially when for most of these kids they are the first in their
families to seek a higher education: There is a sense of pride within them and
within their families. Without affirmative action the playing field is once
again uneven: We are taking a step back instead of forward!
Ana González
Thursday, Mar. 25 1999 at 12:32 |
[Straying Off Topic] This reminds me so much of
other race related topics. Who doesn't remember the OJ Trial? Well, it was
during school hours when the verdict was announced (a mere hour after the case
was handed to the jury.) Every black person in the cafeteria watching the
telecast jumped up an cheered. Most of us had that other feeling...that
"oh god this trial just hit rock bottom" feeling. He might have
gotten off because he was a celebrity. It may have been his skin color, but the
support was divided by race again when it really shouldn't have. The blood, the
shoeprints, the DNA...it all pointed to OJ. To me, the verdict was a no
brainer. To Shapiro, the verdict should have be a no brainer, but it didn't
happen that way. What I'm getting at is that race clouds a lot of issues. I
know it's a fact that none of us look at Black people, White people, Asian
people in the same light. Stereotypes rule our society, but the solution is not
a looser set of standards for any particular colorset...It makes little sense
to me when there are blurs between the lines. Why interchange economic issues
with skin-color? The solution to underpresentation in the workplace nad
upper-level education is not lower standards, but it's the breaking down of the
stereotypes and preconceptions. Unfortunately, that's a slow process, but to
me, it's the right thing to do. Denying one group and admitting another was
wrong in the 60s, why is the reverse any better?
Eugene Chan
Friday, Mar. 26 1999 at 02:11 |
Also, as an avid Apple Computer fanatic, Jesse
Jackson's attack on Apple's unacceptable number of black management employees
also gets me thinking. Why did he single out Apple Computer when the entire
tech industry is also in the same condition? Unfortunately, it's a combination
of factors. The population density of Silicon Valley is very close to being the
opposite of the East Bay. Geography, Field, growth, all factor in to this.
Frankly, I think JEsse Jackson chose Apple because he could make more shrewd
comments...Why choose Oracle or some other company when I can make snide
comments on how Miles Davis, Cesar Chavez, Jackie Robinson grace Apple
Billboards...
Eugene Chan
Friday, Mar. 26 1999 at 02:18 |
I'm white and I'm from one of the poorest counties
in the U.S., in rural Alabama. I grew up dirt poor and went to a poor high
school in the worst school system in America. I have had a job since I was 15
years old. When I applied for college I knew that the portion of the form that
asked my race or ethnicy was just another strike against me. No one was making
any special admission requiremnents for the poor white kid. But the middle
class black kid got a break. Remember, there are a greater number of white
people living below the poverty line than there are of any other race. I was
instilled with a sense of responsibility, and that has made all the difference.
Today I'm just 31 years old and I'm a lawyer with a masters degree.
Doc
Friday, Mar. 26 1999 at 14:00 |
Why is it okay to give admissions preferences to
athletes, children of alumni, etc, but not to under-represented ethnic and/or
socio-economic groups?
J.H.
Friday, Mar. 26 1999 at 17:47 |
Hmm...a simple onew word answer to the above?
Money... But seriously...more alumni donations and more tickets sold at the
gate... Also, admissions preferences to athletes means the UC is seeking the
best athletes, though not the best students. Don't make the mistake of
comparing athletes to academically minded students. All the athletes have to
compete for the top spot. All the best academically minded students have to
compete for the top spots too, or they SHOULD. With affirmative action, that
does not happen.
Eugene Chan
Friday, Mar. 26 1999 at 21:22 |
If this is a debate about anything..it's about the
poor quality of K-12 that does not prepare each individual for the SATs, the
lack of classes offered, and the obvious differences in the socioeconomic
backgrounds. We can see the how sheltered the students at the Marina Academy
are and how proud they are of it. If these are the types of people we will have
in our society.....well, I won't finish this sentence.
Tina
Saturday, Mar. 27 1999 at 19:49 |
As an Asian American, I personally think most Asian
immigrants or first generation Asian American are misguided about racial
issues. Most Asian immigrants excluding refugees came here with gold bricks in
their luggage. They are upper or upper middle class. Oh
Oh Tepmongkol
Saturday, Mar. 27 1999 at 20:24 |
I am a high school student facing who is soon going
to be facing college. Govenor Gray Davis' top 4% plan is a great way to let the
top four percent of each school's graduating class a shot at a UC college but
one has to look at the make up of most honors/AP classes at ANY school. At my
school, a school that is known for it's academics, that I transfered to, it is
populated almost entirely by whites with sparse compisition of a few asians and
absolutly no blacks. At my home district High school it is still populated with
almost enirely by whites and a few asians and hispanics. Govenor davis' plan
will let the top four percent into the UC system, chiefly whites, while only
increasing minority acceptance by 1% like the show quoted. I feel the pressure
of college mounting on me and am faced with a tough life, life effecting
decision. How am I going to be judged. Currently I'm not in the top four
percent at my rigerous high academic school, but at my home district school I'm
well above the four percent mark, do I transfer or should I stay at a rigerous
school that will prepare me for the rigours of college. To address another
aspect of High schools, funding to each school, it should be easy to figure out
why high acadmic school's get more money, the parents are active. If you attend
any given PTA meeting, at my school, you will find many active parents and a
lot of concerned parents. If their is any problem the parents attack the school
board, go to the city and pound on the door until they get their way. In sharp
contrast my home district school is very laid back. Most parents don't have the
time to attend PTA meetings, a lot can't speak English and most of them are
more concerned about getting their next pay check than their children's
education. So when budget cuts come along, the no hassle choice are the poor
schools. Govenor Davis' plan will not work and many minority students will
become casualties.
Ryan Morehead - rmorehead@hotmail.com
Saturday, Mar. 27 1999 at
20:27 |
what always proves entertaining about affirmative
action are the people who reaped the benefits of it. this black employee at
berkeley who acts like the "self-made man"... please. not that he's
not a hard worker, but how many of those aided with affirmative action were
not? carlos munoz comments should be ringing in your ears right now (see top of
page quote). i was wathcing a program about black television on kqed a couple
weeks ago that featured a segment about the show "good times". do you
remember that woman that played the wife on that show (sorry, bad with names)?
well, the producers (who really wanted her for the role) came to her with the
script, and she liked it, but noticed there was no "husband" or man
of the house, other than that freak j.j.. she refused to play the part until
they wrote in a husband. they were reluctant because other black sitcoms
featured single-parent (mother) households, but they did it. and she insisted.
why? because she realized that sometimes it's necessary to create reality,
create role models. dig? well dynomite. what's upsetting is that the effects
affirmative action had on minority role models probably won't be seen for a
decade or two, and who knows where we'll be by then.
human bean (not a brother karamatoz)
Saturday, Mar. 27 1999 at
20:27 |
Just wanted to address some components of the
affirmative action issue, one being the perception by some prospective students
to UC that they are losing a spot to someone who is supposedly underqualified
because of race. Considering the legacy of race relations in the United States,
racism, exclusion, and discrimination, their complaint PALES in comparison to
the experiences of thousands of minority and underrepresented groups. How many
times have people of color been denied jobs, land, education, rights,
citizenship, and freedom simply because of their race? Several decades of
affirmative action cannot be expected to undo hundreds of years of racism, Jim
Crow, immigration laws, violence and prejudice in such a short time. These
students are not being "denied" going to college. If they do not get
into UC Berkeley, many of these students will probably already have received
acceptance offers from other universities (getting into Berkeley is often
important because of its prestige alone). For many underrepresented students,
the thought of going to Berkeley was just as unfathomable as going to college.
And part of the reason why minority enrollment is down is that these students
didn't apply because they did not feel welcome, not because they "couldn't
cut the mustard." I don't know how many of the people on this list have
studied at Berkeley, but I agree with Carlos Munoz that I have only seen great
things from students who may have entered via affirmative action. As a recent
Cal grad, I can't tell you the number of times I have witnessed the more
privileged students slack off at school and waste an opportunity that others
can only dream of. Such a complaint of being denied entrance to UCB because of
affirmative action is along the lines of "reverse
discrimination/racism" complaint--I doubt many of these students will ever
know what true exclusion feels like until they understand the entire history of
it.
Anthony
Saturday, Mar. 27 1999 at 20:47 |
I'd like to answer Anthony's question above with a
question of my own: how many times have Affirmative Action activists lumped all
"White" people together without bothering to remember all the
discrimination that White people faced in America? Irish immigrants faced
discrimination, Italians were shunned, and Jews were denied admission into
elite universities. Yet all three groups worked hard to prove themselves
worthy. Since there's no apparent statute of limitations for remedies to
"past discrimination", I suppose all three groups deserve a plus
factor for admissions into Berkeley, right?
Adam
Sunday, Mar. 28 1999 at 05:14 |
Does anyone know the graduation statistics of
Affirmative Action students from Berkeley? The reason I ask is that Carlos
Muñoz is quoted as saying the "vast majority" of AA students
are successful, yet several years ago many activists were complaining that a
large percentage of African American and Latino students drop out of Cal each
year, thus throwing suspicion on Mr. Muñoz's assertions.
Adam
Sunday, Mar. 28 1999 at 05:37 |
People just don't know what race brings to the
classroom. One can learn so much by learning from the backgrounds of their
classmates as well as the teachers. I am an Asian-American high school student
from Marin Academy and I feel every day I am teaching other people about where
I come from. This is because my point of view is so different from others
solely based on the fact that I am a minority.
Christopher Yee - cyee@ma.org
Sunday, Mar. 28 1999 at 12:16 |
In Response to Adam's observation about white
discrimination: The difference between the discrimination of whites and people
of color is simply that - color. If you are white it is much easier for you to
be accepted/to blend in. The darker your skin the harder it is for you to
blend. Discrimination is wrong no matter what color you are, but we must keep
it in perspective and remember that if your skin is lighter you will have an
easier time in this world. Ana
Ana
Sunday, Mar. 28 1999 at 18:54 |
Ana, your comment is unfortunately true, but it
defies logic. Why counter something that isn't morally correct with more
morally incorrect programs? Affirmative Action issues like race checkboxes on
college apps shouldn't mean anything. Financial status, on the otherhand, could
mean something. If that means that most beneficiaries of AA are going to be
latino or black, then so be it, but it's STILL not supposed to be based only on
race. That's ridiculous. Eugene Chan
Eugene Chan
Monday, Mar. 29 1999 at 00:08 |
HOME | AFFIRMATIVE ACTION |
AILED & DAMON | ADMISSIONS AT UCB | A PERFECT SCHOOL
Copyright © 1994-2002 KQED, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
