The reality is the true Affirmative Action policies at some of these elite schools operate in the form of legacy admissions, the children of big donors, and athletics ( That take up a huge amount of spots for sports only like rowing -- that is only likely to be offered at elite, upper-class HS's, etc )
Hello Craig, Why is this topic important to you. You seem to discuss the affirmative action decisions of colleges/universities more than other topics like legacy or athletic preference admissions. Please note I am not stating I am in support of using race as a determining factor in admissions. With all of the variables that factor in a person getting accepted to Yale or Princeton, why is the variable of race so important to you.
I analyze current events and news in college admissions and college admissions overall. This is the time of year when most colleges release their entering class profiles. In recent years, Ivies in particular have released less data than ever before, but they and the public both continue to focus on race/ethnicity (especially this year since this is the first entering class to be accepted post-SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. UNC). When these institutions release a greater amount of data about who they are accepting (grades, majors selected, scores, differentiated acceptance rates by gender, geography, etc.) and how admissions decisions are being made, my videos discuss that too.
I don’t get the impression that Craig is discussing this matter more that other college admissions issues. I do believe that Craig, unlike many other college admissions coaches, addresses variety of issues related to college admissions. This is commendable!
Watch this and a LOT of other channels... Craig is not hyperfocusing on this topic... several other show one or two blogs/vlogs on this and other topics.
I think it might be more likely that these colleges, in lieu of race-based affirmative action, are looking at income status and geographic location as a greater factor in admissions - which overall benefits Black students and rural white students more so than Asian-Americans
Thank you for the information. Even if we might disagree on whether or not this is good or bad, having a basic understanding is pivotal. I think some of us care a lot about not suppressing certain populations, while others believe it's an individual's responsibility to overcome systemic racial adversities on their own or pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Regardless of the belief, I think we all agree that we want talented people to have access strong educations which prepare them for leadership regardless of their background. At the end of the day EVERYONE has a hard life and faces challenges regardless of their race. Before we end things like affirmative action my thought is we should have put more effort into figuring out WHY blacks and latinos perform at such low levels and fix it... unless the reason's been shown to be affirmative action. If that's the case, I'd really like more information.
We already know some of the reasons. Hispanics are following a pretty routine immigrant trajectory. They are doing no worse than the Italians or Irish when they first came to America. The blacks have a more stubborn cultural issue. The achievement gap between legacy blacks and immigrant blacks is pretty severe.
What I do know is that there was a time for affirmative action in the past but that time is over. My daughter attended a private school and half her graduating class was black. Most were there with the help of financial aid so, while we had to pay full tuition (and it was not easy), they got to attend practically for free. I think that is help enough. In their relatively small graduating class one black girl went on to Princeton. A couple years prior, 3 girls went to Yale (3 out of about 65 graduates, that's quite an insane percentage. NONE were white). I do believe more black students have (at least in our city) a ridiculous advantage financially to attending top-ranked private high schools (of which there are many to choose from in our county), which ultimately feeds into Top 25 schools. And if you excel at any sport they actually recruit you. In addition, in our school anyway, teachers will bend over backwards to give black students extra help or office time. Just as one example, a black male student fell asleep almost every class period in my daughter's math class (I mean ASLEEP at the desk). Whenever my daughter would attend office hours for clarification on something he was in there getting one-on-one tutoring and taking up all her time. Truth be told, the female teacher was also black. So I think everyone needs to take a step back and understand that it should not be the job of Yale and Princeton to give yet another break to this demographic. I understand that lower-income areas/schools may not have the luxuries of AP classes or advanced technology, but that's why we need to fix the public school system and not just lower expectations or admissions criteria for black or Hispanic students. And for the record, no one who is in this country illegally should be allowed to attend schools in the U.S. THEY are the ones making it more difficult for black students to secure spots. UC schools are a perfect example of this.
@@gigia41 Why do you think anyone is going to fix the public school system in these schools that no one cares about? Shouldn't we fix them FIRST before we limit educational opportunities? You say top schools are not the place that should educate disadvantaged communities, but why not, so long as it's proportional to the communities at large? If the goal of an ivy is to take the top 1% (or less) of the population, then why shouldn't 10% of the positions be able to go to the top 1% of successful people in a disadvantaged group who, even despite being very intelligent and overcoming whatever odds they have, still do not measure up to the top 1% of their non-disadvantaged counterparts? The thing I don't understand is why you think disadvantaged students are doing so poorly if they have overwhelming social support and opportunities throughout the entirety of their lives (in comparison to non-disadvantaged groups)? Disadvantaged students are SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to have experienced ACES (Adverse Childhood Experiences) and, while a lot of these come from family situations, microaggressions and other obstacles shape their self-perception, motivations and aspirations. It's possible things will never be fair for everyone, and it's possible that without affirmative action most disadvantaged people will fall to the bottom and be stuck there given that racism toward these communities is never going to be diminished enough for it to be overcome in a world where what you look like is one of the most important things for determining your social opportunities (friend groups, dating, jobs etc). But still, I think people having the ability to feel like they have a chance at social mobility as well as having representation in influential circles helps to ameliorate inherent social injustice. The second to last thing we should want is large minority demographics feeling like they have no chance at upward mobility. And the very last thing we should want is leadership having no exposure to disadvantaged peers and then being asked to make uninformed decisions that affect everyone in the country.
@@KazaiChan I think you need to re-read what I wrote because your response has little to do with what I stated. "Why do you think anyone is going to fix the public school system in these schools that no one cares about? Shouldn't we fix them FIRST before we limit educational opportunities?" INNER CITIES HAVE THE MOST DIFFICULT HURDLES TO OVERCOME IN TERMS ON PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THEY ARE ALL RUN BY DEMOCRATS. SO STOP VOTING DEMOCRAT WOULD BE A GREAT START. ALSO, I NEVER SAID WE SHOULDN'T FIX THEM FIRST, SO NOT SURE WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM. "You say top schools are not the place that should educate disadvantaged communities, but why not, so long as it's proportional to the communities at large?" I NEVER SAID TOP SCHOOLS ARE NOT THE PLACE TO EDUCATE DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS. WHAT I SAID WAS, IF ANYTHING, THEY ARE AT AN ADVANTAGE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CARRY THE FINANCIAL BURDEN TO ATTEND THE SAME SCHOOL. ALSO, WHEN 50% OF YOUR PRIVATE SCHOOL IS BLACK, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT IS NOT PROPORTIONAL TO THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE. "Why shouldn't 10% of the positions be able to go to the top 1% of successful people in a disadvantaged group?" I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. THE AVERAGE IS 8% OF STUDENTS AT IVIES ARE BLACK. WHAT IS DISPROPORTIONATE IS NOT THE % OF WHITE STUDENTS (WHICH IS ROUGHLY 40-45%) BUT THE % OF ASIAN STUDENTS. BUT I DON'T THINK THEY WILL BE QUICK TO GIVE UP THEIR SPOTS TO THE "DISADVANTAGED" BLACK POPULATION? ALSO, EVERYONE NEEDS TO STOP LUMPING ALL NON-WHITE STUDENTS INTO ONE "POC" CATEGORY, BECAUSE THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE BIGGEST DISSERVICE TO BLACK STUDENTS. "The thing I don't understand is why you think disadvantaged students are doing so poorly if they have overwhelming social support and opportunities throughout the entirety of their lives (in comparison to non-disadvantaged groups)?" IT STARTS AT HOME. ALSO, AS SOON AS KIDS REMOVE THEMSELVES FROM THE VICTIM LABEL IT WILL CREATE MENTAL EQUALITY. THE ONES WHO ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL AT MY DAUGHTER'S SCHOOL ARE THE ONES WHO DO NOT VIEW THEMSELVES THAT WAY. THE ONE WHO FALLS ASLEEP IN CLASS IS THE FIRST ONE WHO WILL CLAIM HE'S A VCTIM. HE IS ALSO THE SON OF ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS, SO TAKE THAT FOR WHAT IT IS. "microaggressions" TRUMP SUPPORTERS HAVE BEEN THE RECEIVERS OF MACRO-AGGRESSIONS FOR A DECADE NOW. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT. "It's possible things will never be fair for everyone." IT'S CALLED LIFE AND OFTEN HAS TO DO WITH THINGS OTHER THAN POVERTY OR RACE. "it's possible that without affirmative action most disadvantaged people will fall to the bottom and be stuck there given that racism toward these communities is never going to be diminished enough for it to be overcome." ARE YOU SERIOUS? THIS ATTITUDE IS EXACTLY THE REASON WHY SO MANY BLACK YOUTH FEEL DESPONDENT. THAT'S THE OPPOSITE OF ENCOURAGEMENT AND SUPPORT TO SAY YOU WILL ALWAYS BE THE VICTIM NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO. THAT'S AWFUL. "But still, I think people having the ability to feel like they have a chance at social mobility as well as having representation in influential circles helps to ameliorate inherent social injustice." PLEASE STOP READING SOCIOLOGY TEXTBOOKS. BY REPRESENTATION YOU MEAN COLOR, WHICH IS SUCH A RACIST THING TO SAY THAT THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN MEANS YOU REPRESENT EVERYONE IN THAT DEMOGRAPHIC. CLEARLY THAT DIDN'T WORK FOR OBAMA, WHO DID ABSOLUTELY ZILCH FOR THE BLACK COMMUNITY. AND SHOW ME WHERE A BLACK LEADER IN POLITICS HAS REPRESENTED HIS DEMOGRAPHIC WELL. NY? NO. CHICAGO? NO. DETROIT? NO. BALTIMORE? HELL NO.
@@KazaiChan what educational opportunities are being limited for these groups you feel so sorry for? Howard, Spelman, Morehouse and Xavier have done more for black social mobility than the entire ivy league combined. What you are advocating is racial charity granted at the expense of a largely immigrant asian population.
@CollegeMeister The reason, I would not consider it a wash for Princeton, is that the percentage attributed to unknown is too large a number to ignore in this equation.This number could skew the results. In the MIT admission data, there were no reported values for this unknown group.
You say "whether or not this is legal." When Justice Roberts wrote, "“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise” he made it 100% legal.
The full quote from the majority opinion is as follows: "At the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise. See, e.g., 4 App. in No. 21-707, at 1725-1726, 1741; Tr. of Oral Arg. in No. 20-1199, at 10. But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name.” Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, 325 (1867). A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual-not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice."
@@CollegeMeister Oh, that's interesting. All of the following part I quote below seems false. Most of the minorities I've met in the universities have overcome great odds and shown a lot of success, just often not academically. I wonder if the Supreme Court and the Right Wing people just don't value the same types of obstacles as other people. At the end of the day, it all comes down to values and Trump was able to stack the court.
There is a very common principal of law that you cannot do indirectly that which you cannot do directly. These guys are playing stupid games, they're gonna win stupid prizes.
@@cl10367 I think they feel like providing people opportunities and standing up for what they believe in is worth dying on the sword for. And Donald Trump's republicans have the sword.
I think these results are indicative of the reality of the fact that the same elite students who were likely to get into elite schools before the SC ruling .. are the same elite students likely to get into these schools post-SC ruling. One aspect of the AA debate that I felt was not considered enough was the graduation rates amongst these demographics at these schools. The reality is that students no matter their demographic at schools like Yale and Princeton tend to graduate at about the same rate -- which indicates that the students they've been admitting were highly qualified students.
I disagree. I have an ivy education and I felt like there were minorities who had less of an academic background than a lot of others. That said, I still think a lot of these minorities are elite due to what they've overcome AND many of them had non-academic achievements which were INCREDIBLE. I think most of them deserved the opportunity and went on to do AMAZING things after graduation. At the end of the day, Ivy's need to pull the cream of the crop and they need to identify individuals who have that spark to be incredible. Scores alone simply cannot catch some demographic populations if they've had to overcome specific types of adversity. This is why affirmative action is needed. Plus, those of us who came from backgrounds with less diversity NEED the exposure to people from other ethnic groups so that we can be good, inclusive, and knowledgeable leaders.
@@KazaiChan I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Minorities had less of an academic background " If you mean that they tend to not have as much academic support ( I.e expensive tutors, test prep or attend high-end private schools, etc ) as others then I agree with you. But I also have some connection to the IVy world. I currently have a daughter at an Ivy... and know 3 other Black students currently at Iyies and they are all doing exceptionally well. In fact, My daugher has mentioned many times that the most impressive students at her school tend to be POCs. My point was that these were the students being admitted before the SC ruling .. and are the students being admitted post-ruling. Again, one only has to look at the graduation rates of these schools to find that Black and Brown students graduate at about the same rate as other groups. Where I think Affirmative Action helped by giving these schools the ability to intentionally and openly curate diverse student bodies -- which was great for the school on numerous levels.
@@CollegeMeister That may be the case. And it may be becase the students curated to attend Ivy League schools are meticulously selected to be able to handle the rigor of an IVy league school. So while the admission process may be challenging given the number of applicants applying for a minute amount of slots -- graduation data suggests that these schools do a decent job of identifying students across various demographic categories who can handle the school's rigor.
I work at Columbia, and the Supreme Court ruling has led to some unintended consequences: 1. Unfortunately ban of Affirmative Action coincides with a funding crisis of underfunded & underpaid universities & colleges, as well as underpaid professors. We are currently seeing more "Legacy & Millionaire Donor" children getting colleges spots, at the expense of Asian students. Not sure if the lawyers, and the backers should have seen that coming. 2. *Many Asian students probably didnt even realize it... but they actually profitted from Affirmative Action.* Many students who didnt have good English grades were extended college admissions in the last 20 years. This practice has stopped especially for Asian students who werent born in the United States. 3. The ban of Affirmative Action also led to a recruiting of other students with high test scores from Nigeria & Ghana, instead of African-American students. Nigerians are 0.0007% of the US population. But in Harvard Nigerians (or Americans with Nigerian parents) are now 70% of Black students.
I think the main reason these elite schools favor diversity is not mainly because they have some mission to help out the underprivileged... but becase a diverse student body allows these schools to offer a better education to all students as diverse perspectives and backgrounds lead to better class discussions.
So are the discussions at the overwhelming majority of the world best colleges and universities sub standards? Is their education substandard? How about Howard University? How important is diversity to the quality of their education?
@@cl10367 No, the discussions at the world's best colleges are not substandard in part due to their diversity. Good question. HBCUs were created due to the hostile apartheid that existed in America for the bulk of American history, so I think like Military, Art, and Tech schools, they tend to operate with different mission statements than traditional colleges..
@@cl10367 I think another and just as important reason these elite schools like diversity is to be able to attract the best and brightest no matter their background .
Hey @CollegeMeister, just want to say-students get into top schools because they’ve earned it. Let’s give credit where it’s due and stop comparing data from previous admissions cycles just to point out a drop in racial diversity.
Of course they've earned, it, there's plenty of minorities who get rejected. However, this doesn't mean that there aren't other students just as if not more qualified than SOME of these students that get rejected because their race doesn't fill out the class as well.
@@michaeloseiowusu-pi4jp admissions officers themselves have rejected the idea that admissions is “earned” or “won”. They instead opt for the word “fit”. And with admissions offices being overwhelmingly leftist, one feature that they feel matters a great deal is race, which the applicant has no control over whatsoever.
Agreed. If any there are kids who get into elite schools due to factors other than Meriit --- it is legacy students Pretty much everyone else Black Brown otherwise is due to merit.
@@edmundlee4087 I'm not sure that admissions offices are overwhelmingly leftist, as these elite schools sure put out a lot of non-leftist graduates. The reason I think they go with "fit" instead of won or earned -is because I don't think they see admins to their schools as a contest or sport .. rather they view themselves as an institution or learning ... with many different disciplines, etc .....where they feel a diverse ( By ethnicity, gender, sex, geographical region, the field of study etc ) student body makes for a better campus environment... so this may mean the Black applicant might be rejected and a while applicant accepted and vice versa ..... or Trumpet player from North Dakota accepted and a Trumpet player from Miami refected .. and vice versa
Liars Liars Ivy Pants on fire!! Oh wouldn't it be great to get all the raw date and make true comparisons!! Prediction: They will both get sued!! And they will lose again!!
@@CollegeMeisterGiven the implications of the word infection in this post, you should take your own advice and begin speaking directly. Providing sunlight on your own views will allow others to judge you and your services fully.
@@4justinwillams Race based admissions is wrong. The majority of Americans agree. The Supreme Court agrees. Clarence Thomas decries it and has called Harvard a historically racist institution. Why don’t you look in the mirror and ask yourself why you as a member of the liberal left are so obsessed with race?
@@4justinwillams do you think he is being too coy about disliking the racial discrimination? There are few if any college consultants that think the discrimination against Asians in this process was ok. They will obviously advise their urm clients to use it to their advantage but they see the discrimination in their job every year and have to give different advice to an Asian student with exactly the same application as a student of any other race.
Across all these SC/AA videos, you sound like you aren't even trying to hide the fact that your are extremely unhappy that schools seeking a healthy ethic, racial and cultural mix that reflects the mix of a multicultural America. Maybe you don't realize it. If so, FYI. Maybe you are virtue signalling to customer segment. Maybe you know it and these are strongly held opinions. Either way, it's pretty shocking to hear it in your tone of voice and choice of words. And it's in stark contrast to your matter-of-fact tone on all the other content material. I've enjoyed your material in the past, but this seeming disgust for multi cultural college campuses is making it a lot harder for me to keep listening.
@I-used-to-be-orcaz Well, re listen to the quote midway through video where he says "the white and Asian population... are less important to the powers that be" than other races. That was an incredibly inciting claim to make. I think I was being kind with my assessment. He seems to not be hiding his thoughts. I'm leaving room for my own misunderstanding.
@@4justinwillamsCraig is 100% correct, elite colleges do not care about the white or Asian numbers. This is not controversial. Either you’re naive or just disingenuous
Have you read the full opinion of the Supreme Court? I encourage you to at www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf The critical full pull quote around which this video revolves is as follows: "At the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise. See, e.g., 4 App. in No. 21-707, at 1725-1726, 1741; Tr. of Oral Arg. in No. 20-1199, at 10. But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name.” Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, 325 (1867). A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual-not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice." Also, what is "a healthy ethnic, racial and cultural mix that reflects the mix of a multicultural America?" After last year's Supreme Court ruling, some would make the argument that admissions officers are manifestly in contravention of the law if they seek to answer such a question when making admissions decisions because "universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime" that the Supreme Court has now held unlawful and "the prohibition against racial discrimination is 'levelled at the thing, not the name.'"
I wonder if this then easily opens up the opportunity for kids to well.....lie on the essay? It's not like a GPA, transcript, or ACT score that is all verifiable. A student could choose not to identify their race on the application and write a great essay about how hard it was to be a minority in a specific environment. Seems like the colleges have opened themselves up to this if they are relying so heavily on something like an essay that cannot be verified?
Why would this be new? Lying has always been an option with the fuzzier & softer aspects of a college application. This wouldn't seem to expand anything.
The reality is the true Affirmative Action policies at some of these elite schools operate in the form of legacy admissions, the children of big donors, and athletics ( That take up a huge amount of spots for sports only like rowing -- that is only likely to be offered at elite, upper-class HS's, etc )
@@Goodguy1ful you'll get no argument from me on legacy and sports but race is the only preference that is constitionally forbidden.
Circumvent?!!? No they complied. You can't assume they didn't comply, because you didn't get your way.
We can suspect and then through discovery we can establish the truth of the matter.
Hello Craig, Why is this topic important to you. You seem to discuss the affirmative action decisions of colleges/universities more than other topics like legacy or athletic preference admissions. Please note I am not stating I am in support of using race as a determining factor in admissions. With all of the variables that factor in a person getting accepted to Yale or Princeton, why is the variable of race so important to you.
I analyze current events and news in college admissions and college admissions overall. This is the time of year when most colleges release their entering class profiles. In recent years, Ivies in particular have released less data than ever before, but they and the public both continue to focus on race/ethnicity (especially this year since this is the first entering class to be accepted post-SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. UNC). When these institutions release a greater amount of data about who they are accepting (grades, majors selected, scores, differentiated acceptance rates by gender, geography, etc.) and how admissions decisions are being made, my videos discuss that too.
I don’t get the impression that Craig is discussing this matter more that other college admissions issues. I do believe that Craig, unlike many other college admissions coaches, addresses variety of issues related to college admissions. This is commendable!
@@edmond_HFX Thank you!
Watch this and a LOT of other channels... Craig is not hyperfocusing on this topic... several other show one or two blogs/vlogs on this and other topics.
I think it might be more likely that these colleges, in lieu of race-based affirmative action, are looking at income status and geographic location as a greater factor in admissions - which overall benefits Black students and rural white students more so than Asian-Americans
The colleges all said they couldn't maintain diversity this way. The economists from both sides agreed.
Thank you for the information. Even if we might disagree on whether or not this is good or bad, having a basic understanding is pivotal. I think some of us care a lot about not suppressing certain populations, while others believe it's an individual's responsibility to overcome systemic racial adversities on their own or pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Regardless of the belief, I think we all agree that we want talented people to have access strong educations which prepare them for leadership regardless of their background. At the end of the day EVERYONE has a hard life and faces challenges regardless of their race. Before we end things like affirmative action my thought is we should have put more effort into figuring out WHY blacks and latinos perform at such low levels and fix it... unless the reason's been shown to be affirmative action. If that's the case, I'd really like more information.
We already know some of the reasons.
Hispanics are following a pretty routine immigrant trajectory. They are doing no worse than the Italians or Irish when they first came to America.
The blacks have a more stubborn cultural issue. The achievement gap between legacy blacks and immigrant blacks is pretty severe.
What I do know is that there was a time for affirmative action in the past but that time is over. My daughter attended a private school and half her graduating class was black. Most were there with the help of financial aid so, while we had to pay full tuition (and it was not easy), they got to attend practically for free. I think that is help enough. In their relatively small graduating class one black girl went on to Princeton. A couple years prior, 3 girls went to Yale (3 out of about 65 graduates, that's quite an insane percentage. NONE were white). I do believe more black students have (at least in our city) a ridiculous advantage financially to attending top-ranked private high schools (of which there are many to choose from in our county), which ultimately feeds into Top 25 schools. And if you excel at any sport they actually recruit you.
In addition, in our school anyway, teachers will bend over backwards to give black students extra help or office time. Just as one example, a black male student fell asleep almost every class period in my daughter's math class (I mean ASLEEP at the desk). Whenever my daughter would attend office hours for clarification on something he was in there getting one-on-one tutoring and taking up all her time. Truth be told, the female teacher was also black. So I think everyone needs to take a step back and understand that it should not be the job of Yale and Princeton to give yet another break to this demographic. I understand that lower-income areas/schools may not have the luxuries of AP classes or advanced technology, but that's why we need to fix the public school system and not just lower expectations or admissions criteria for black or Hispanic students.
And for the record, no one who is in this country illegally should be allowed to attend schools in the U.S. THEY are the ones making it more difficult for black students to secure spots. UC schools are a perfect example of this.
@@gigia41 Why do you think anyone is going to fix the public school system in these schools that no one cares about? Shouldn't we fix them FIRST before we limit educational opportunities? You say top schools are not the place that should educate disadvantaged communities, but why not, so long as it's proportional to the communities at large? If the goal of an ivy is to take the top 1% (or less) of the population, then why shouldn't 10% of the positions be able to go to the top 1% of successful people in a disadvantaged group who, even despite being very intelligent and overcoming whatever odds they have, still do not measure up to the top 1% of their non-disadvantaged counterparts?
The thing I don't understand is why you think disadvantaged students are doing so poorly if they have overwhelming social support and opportunities throughout the entirety of their lives (in comparison to non-disadvantaged groups)?
Disadvantaged students are SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to have experienced ACES (Adverse Childhood Experiences) and, while a lot of these come from family situations, microaggressions and other obstacles shape their self-perception, motivations and aspirations. It's possible things will never be fair for everyone, and it's possible that without affirmative action most disadvantaged people will fall to the bottom and be stuck there given that racism toward these communities is never going to be diminished enough for it to be overcome in a world where what you look like is one of the most important things for determining your social opportunities (friend groups, dating, jobs etc). But still, I think people having the ability to feel like they have a chance at social mobility as well as having representation in influential circles helps to ameliorate inherent social injustice. The second to last thing we should want is large minority demographics feeling like they have no chance at upward mobility. And the very last thing we should want is leadership having no exposure to disadvantaged peers and then being asked to make uninformed decisions that affect everyone in the country.
@@KazaiChan I think you need to re-read what I wrote because your response has little to do with what I stated.
"Why do you think anyone is going to fix the public school system in these schools that no one cares about? Shouldn't we fix them FIRST before we limit educational opportunities?"
INNER CITIES HAVE THE MOST DIFFICULT HURDLES TO OVERCOME IN TERMS ON PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THEY ARE ALL RUN BY DEMOCRATS. SO STOP VOTING DEMOCRAT WOULD BE A GREAT START. ALSO, I NEVER SAID WE SHOULDN'T FIX THEM FIRST, SO NOT SURE WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM.
"You say top schools are not the place that should educate disadvantaged communities, but why not, so long as it's proportional to the communities at large?"
I NEVER SAID TOP SCHOOLS ARE NOT THE PLACE TO EDUCATE DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS. WHAT I SAID WAS, IF ANYTHING, THEY ARE AT AN ADVANTAGE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CARRY THE FINANCIAL BURDEN TO ATTEND THE SAME SCHOOL. ALSO, WHEN 50% OF YOUR PRIVATE SCHOOL IS BLACK, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT IS NOT PROPORTIONAL TO THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.
"Why shouldn't 10% of the positions be able to go to the top 1% of successful people in a disadvantaged group?"
I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. THE AVERAGE IS 8% OF STUDENTS AT IVIES ARE BLACK. WHAT IS DISPROPORTIONATE IS NOT THE % OF WHITE STUDENTS (WHICH IS ROUGHLY 40-45%) BUT THE % OF ASIAN STUDENTS. BUT I DON'T THINK THEY WILL BE QUICK TO GIVE UP THEIR SPOTS TO THE "DISADVANTAGED" BLACK POPULATION? ALSO, EVERYONE NEEDS TO STOP LUMPING ALL NON-WHITE STUDENTS INTO ONE "POC" CATEGORY, BECAUSE THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE BIGGEST DISSERVICE TO BLACK STUDENTS.
"The thing I don't understand is why you think disadvantaged students are doing so poorly if they have overwhelming social support and opportunities throughout the entirety of their lives (in comparison to non-disadvantaged groups)?"
IT STARTS AT HOME. ALSO, AS SOON AS KIDS REMOVE THEMSELVES FROM THE VICTIM LABEL IT WILL CREATE MENTAL EQUALITY. THE ONES WHO ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL AT MY DAUGHTER'S SCHOOL ARE THE ONES WHO DO NOT VIEW THEMSELVES THAT WAY. THE ONE WHO FALLS ASLEEP IN CLASS IS THE FIRST ONE WHO WILL CLAIM HE'S A VCTIM. HE IS ALSO THE SON OF ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS, SO TAKE THAT FOR WHAT IT IS.
"microaggressions"
TRUMP SUPPORTERS HAVE BEEN THE RECEIVERS OF MACRO-AGGRESSIONS FOR A DECADE NOW. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT.
"It's possible things will never be fair for everyone."
IT'S CALLED LIFE AND OFTEN HAS TO DO WITH THINGS OTHER THAN POVERTY OR RACE.
"it's possible that without affirmative action most disadvantaged people will fall to the bottom and be stuck there given that racism toward these communities is never going to be diminished enough for it to be overcome."
ARE YOU SERIOUS? THIS ATTITUDE IS EXACTLY THE REASON WHY SO MANY BLACK YOUTH FEEL DESPONDENT. THAT'S THE OPPOSITE OF ENCOURAGEMENT AND SUPPORT TO SAY YOU WILL ALWAYS BE THE VICTIM NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO. THAT'S AWFUL.
"But still, I think people having the ability to feel like they have a chance at social mobility as well as having representation in influential circles helps to ameliorate inherent social injustice."
PLEASE STOP READING SOCIOLOGY TEXTBOOKS. BY REPRESENTATION YOU MEAN COLOR, WHICH IS SUCH A RACIST THING TO SAY THAT THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN MEANS YOU REPRESENT EVERYONE IN THAT DEMOGRAPHIC. CLEARLY THAT DIDN'T WORK FOR OBAMA, WHO DID ABSOLUTELY ZILCH FOR THE BLACK COMMUNITY. AND SHOW ME WHERE A BLACK LEADER IN POLITICS HAS REPRESENTED HIS DEMOGRAPHIC WELL. NY? NO. CHICAGO? NO. DETROIT? NO. BALTIMORE? HELL NO.
@@KazaiChan what educational opportunities are being limited for these groups you feel so sorry for? Howard, Spelman, Morehouse and Xavier have done more for black social mobility than the entire ivy league combined.
What you are advocating is racial charity granted at the expense of a largely immigrant asian population.
Will MIT decide to change their essay prompts for the class of 2030? Will everybody else?
The pressure is already immense to do so.
@CollegeMeister The reason, I would not consider it a wash for Princeton, is that the percentage attributed to unknown is too large a number to ignore in this equation.This number could skew the results. In the MIT admission data, there were no reported values for this unknown group.
You say "whether or not this is legal." When Justice Roberts wrote, "“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise” he made it 100% legal.
The full quote from the majority opinion is as follows:
"At the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise. See, e.g., 4 App. in No. 21-707, at 1725-1726, 1741; Tr. of Oral Arg. in No. 20-1199, at 10. But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name.” Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, 325 (1867). A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual-not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice."
@@CollegeMeister Oh, that's interesting. All of the following part I quote below seems false. Most of the minorities I've met in the universities have overcome great odds and shown a lot of success, just often not academically. I wonder if the Supreme Court and the Right Wing people just don't value the same types of obstacles as other people. At the end of the day, it all comes down to values and Trump was able to stack the court.
There is a very common principal of law that you cannot do indirectly that which you cannot do directly.
These guys are playing stupid games, they're gonna win stupid prizes.
@@cl10367 I think they feel like providing people opportunities and standing up for what they believe in is worth dying on the sword for. And Donald Trump's republicans have the sword.
@@KazaiChan their being racist.
I think these results are indicative of the reality of the fact that the same elite students who were likely to get into elite schools before the SC ruling .. are the same elite students likely to get into these schools post-SC ruling. One aspect of the AA debate that I felt was not considered enough was the graduation rates amongst these demographics at these schools. The reality is that students no matter their demographic at schools like Yale and Princeton tend to graduate at about the same rate -- which indicates that the students they've been admitting were highly qualified students.
I disagree. I have an ivy education and I felt like there were minorities who had less of an academic background than a lot of others. That said, I still think a lot of these minorities are elite due to what they've overcome AND many of them had non-academic achievements which were INCREDIBLE. I think most of them deserved the opportunity and went on to do AMAZING things after graduation. At the end of the day, Ivy's need to pull the cream of the crop and they need to identify individuals who have that spark to be incredible. Scores alone simply cannot catch some demographic populations if they've had to overcome specific types of adversity. This is why affirmative action is needed. Plus, those of us who came from backgrounds with less diversity NEED the exposure to people from other ethnic groups so that we can be good, inclusive, and knowledgeable leaders.
@@KazaiChan I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Minorities had less of an academic background " If you mean that they tend to not have as much academic support ( I.e expensive tutors, test prep or attend high-end private schools, etc ) as others then I agree with you. But I also have some connection to the IVy world. I currently have a daughter at an Ivy... and know 3 other Black students currently at Iyies and they are all doing exceptionally well. In fact, My daugher has mentioned many times that the most impressive students at her school tend to be POCs. My point was that these were the students being admitted before the SC ruling .. and are the students being admitted post-ruling. Again, one only has to look at the graduation rates of these schools to find that Black and Brown students graduate at about the same rate as other groups. Where I think Affirmative Action helped by giving these schools the ability to intentionally and openly curate diverse student bodies -- which was great for the school on numerous levels.
It's far harder to get into an Ivy League college than it is to get good grades at and graduate from an Ivy League college.
@@CollegeMeister That may be the case. And it may be becase the students curated to attend Ivy League schools are meticulously selected to be able to handle the rigor of an IVy league school. So while the admission process may be challenging given the number of applicants applying for a minute amount of slots -- graduation data suggests that these schools do a decent job of identifying students across various demographic categories who can handle the school's rigor.
I work at Columbia, and the Supreme Court ruling has led to some unintended consequences:
1. Unfortunately ban of Affirmative Action coincides with a funding crisis of underfunded & underpaid universities & colleges, as well as underpaid professors.
We are currently seeing more "Legacy & Millionaire Donor" children getting colleges spots, at the expense of Asian students. Not sure if the lawyers, and the backers should have seen that coming.
2. *Many Asian students probably didnt even realize it... but they actually profitted from Affirmative Action.* Many students who didnt have good English grades were extended college admissions in the last 20 years. This practice has stopped especially for Asian students who werent born in the United States.
3. The ban of Affirmative Action also led to a recruiting of other students with high test scores from Nigeria & Ghana, instead of African-American students. Nigerians are 0.0007% of the US population. But in Harvard Nigerians (or Americans with Nigerian parents) are now 70% of Black students.
I think the main reason these elite schools favor diversity is not mainly because they have some mission to help out the underprivileged... but becase a diverse student body allows these schools to offer a better education to all students as diverse perspectives and backgrounds lead to better class discussions.
So are the discussions at the overwhelming majority of the world best colleges and universities sub standards? Is their education substandard?
How about Howard University? How important is diversity to the quality of their education?
@@cl10367 No, the discussions at the world's best colleges are not substandard in part due to their diversity.
Good question. HBCUs were created due to the hostile apartheid that existed in America for the bulk of American history, so I think like Military, Art, and Tech schools, they tend to operate with different mission statements than traditional colleges..
@@cl10367 I think another and just as important reason these elite schools like diversity is to be able to attract the best and brightest no matter their background .
@@Goodguy1ful most of the world best universities are pretty homogenous.
@@Goodguy1ful people from around the world aren't flocking to Harvard so they can take a class with a black kid. Gtfoh
Justice Roberts said students could say in their application how race affected them in growing up in America in his decision.
Parent here and your viewpoint reflects an obvious bias.
Yes, he is clearly against racial discrimination.
Hey @CollegeMeister, just want to say-students get into top schools because they’ve earned it. Let’s give credit where it’s due and stop comparing data from previous admissions cycles just to point out a drop in racial diversity.
Of course they've earned, it, there's plenty of minorities who get rejected. However, this doesn't mean that there aren't other students just as if not more qualified than SOME of these students that get rejected because their race doesn't fill out the class as well.
@@michaeloseiowusu-pi4jp admissions officers themselves have rejected the idea that admissions is “earned” or “won”. They instead opt for the word “fit”. And with admissions offices being overwhelmingly leftist, one feature that they feel matters a great deal is race, which the applicant has no control over whatsoever.
Agreed. If any there are kids who get into elite schools due to factors other than Meriit --- it is legacy students Pretty much everyone else Black Brown otherwise is due to merit.
@@edmundlee4087 I'm not sure that admissions offices are overwhelmingly leftist, as these elite schools sure put out a lot of non-leftist graduates. The reason I think they go with "fit" instead of won or earned -is because I don't think they see admins to their schools as a contest or sport .. rather they view themselves as an institution or learning ... with many different disciplines, etc .....where they feel a diverse ( By ethnicity, gender, sex, geographical region, the field of study etc ) student body makes for a better campus environment... so this may mean the Black applicant might be rejected and a while applicant accepted and vice versa ..... or Trumpet player from North Dakota accepted and a Trumpet player from Miami refected .. and vice versa
@@Goodguy1ful no it's frequently due to skin color
Okay….Rayyc!st…
Liars Liars Ivy Pants on fire!! Oh wouldn't it be great to get all the raw date and make true comparisons!! Prediction: They will both get sued!! And they will lose again!!
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
@@CollegeMeisterGiven the implications of the word infection in this post, you should take your own advice and begin speaking directly. Providing sunlight on your own views will allow others to judge you and your services fully.
@@4justinwillams Race based admissions is wrong. The majority of Americans agree. The Supreme Court agrees. Clarence Thomas decries it and has called Harvard a historically racist institution. Why don’t you look in the mirror and ask yourself why you as a member of the liberal left are so obsessed with race?
@@4justinwillams do you think he is being too coy about disliking the racial discrimination?
There are few if any college consultants that think the discrimination against Asians in this process was ok. They will obviously advise their urm clients to use it to their advantage but they see the discrimination in their job every year and have to give different advice to an Asian student with exactly the same application as a student of any other race.
Across all these SC/AA videos, you sound like you aren't even trying to hide the fact that your are extremely unhappy that schools seeking a healthy ethic, racial and cultural mix that reflects the mix of a multicultural America.
Maybe you don't realize it. If so, FYI. Maybe you are virtue signalling to customer segment. Maybe you know it and these are strongly held opinions.
Either way, it's pretty shocking to hear it in your tone of voice and choice of words. And it's in stark contrast to your matter-of-fact tone on all the other content material.
I've enjoyed your material in the past, but this seeming disgust for multi cultural college campuses is making it a lot harder for me to keep listening.
I think he might just be against affirmative action you can still respectfully disagree without assaulting his character
@I-used-to-be-orcaz Well, re listen to the quote midway through video where he says "the white and Asian population... are less important to the powers that be" than other races.
That was an incredibly inciting claim to make. I think I was being kind with my assessment. He seems to not be hiding his thoughts. I'm leaving room for my own misunderstanding.
@@4justinwillamsCraig is 100% correct, elite colleges do not care about the white or Asian numbers. This is not controversial. Either you’re naive or just disingenuous
@@4justinwillams give me the timestamp please
Have you read the full opinion of the Supreme Court? I encourage you to at www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf
The critical full pull quote around which this video revolves is as follows:
"At the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise. See, e.g., 4 App. in No. 21-707, at 1725-1726, 1741; Tr. of Oral Arg. in No. 20-1199, at 10. But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name.” Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, 325 (1867). A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual-not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice."
Also, what is "a healthy ethnic, racial and cultural mix that reflects the mix of a multicultural America?" After last year's Supreme Court ruling, some would make the argument that admissions officers are manifestly in contravention of the law if they seek to answer such a question when making admissions decisions because "universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime" that the Supreme Court has now held unlawful and "the prohibition against racial discrimination is 'levelled at the thing, not the name.'"
I wonder if this then easily opens up the opportunity for kids to well.....lie on the essay? It's not like a GPA, transcript, or ACT score that is all verifiable. A student could choose not to identify their race on the application and write a great essay about how hard it was to be a minority in a specific environment. Seems like the colleges have opened themselves up to this if they are relying so heavily on something like an essay that cannot be verified?
Sadly, deceit was already endemic in the American college admissions process, and recent developments certainly don't disincentivize it.
Why would this be new? Lying has always been an option with the fuzzier & softer aspects of a college application. This wouldn't seem to expand anything.
@@4justinwillams as noted above, it increases the rewards for this deceit.