You know - some of us aren’t as stupid as you would like.
The topic is minority admissions. You get the first portion of your info correct - then - switch to the bait and switch -
To quote: “The net effect OF STRATEGIC BEHAVIOR is to slightly decrease minority representation in the pool.”
Your data is a fine example of modern weak thinking. This is the modern propaganda style. Three sentences about topic A, followed by a conclusion statement that LOOKS like it applies to topic A - but actually reports on topic B.
The topic is minority representation. Not STRATEGIC BEHAVIOR.
Take your distorting propaganda and go pound sand.
That top 10% solution, which I believe Jeb Bush also used in FL, was of course simply intended to yield affirmative action results without the express use of quotas per se. And that has been the result. My point still stands, as ET seems to have realized.
You said "top 25% or whatever it is" in a suggestion that it wouldn't take much for a hispanic to get into the top "25%" of a high school with a mostly hispanic population.
I illustrated with FACTS that your notion is false. Students in Texas move to the very districts you point to and bump ALL MINORITIES down in the pecking order to get into college.
That's the truth and you can pound sand yourself.