Posted on 09/26/2011 6:17:37 PM PDT by SmithL
The Berkeley College Republicans have taken a strong stance against a proposed law that would allow, among other things, race to be taken into consideration during the admissions process. They say on a Facebook event page: "The Berkeley College Republicans firmly believe measuring any admit's merit based on race is intrinsically racist."
In this note I'll show that their belief is wrong. Not only is the use of race in admissions not intrinsically racist - the failure to consider race and other similar factors is intrinsically racist. This is not some subjective interpretation of histories of oppression. This is not some radical ideological interpretation of "fairness". Rather, I'll point out some ways in which if race is not considered, some minority students who are objectively more qualified are likely to be turned away in favor of white students who are objectively less qualified.
Background: The Bake Sale and the Bill
The College Republicans have stirred up some press attention by holding a "racial diversity bakesale" to protest California Senate Bill 185.
The senate bill, which sits on Governor Jerry Brown's desk awaiting signature or veto, would allow the University of California admissions offices to consider an applicant's "race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, geographic origin, and household income, along with other relevant factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions, so long as no preference is given."
The Republican students organized a satirical bake sale, offering goods at higher prices to whites, lower prices to minorities and women. In short, they argue that any use of race or gender in admissions is tantamount to a racial preference.
On campus and in the press there is debate about whether the bake sale is "offensive". This misses the point entirely:
Background: What Does Standardized Testing Measure?
One measure of a student's merit for admission is an SAT score. It has long been observed that, on average, whites perform better than, for example, blacks on this test.
Part of the explanation for the better performance of whites is surely that, on average, whites are more likely to have economic advantage and have better K-12 educational opportunities. The question arises, though: is that the only reason for the differences in average scores? Or is the test itself inherently racially biased in some way that has nothing to do with student merit?
Inside Higher Ed reported on a study published by the Harvard Educational Review in 2010. The study examines the question: do black students tend to get worse SAT scores than white students of equal academic achievement and merit?
The study found that, yes, SATs tend to give lower scores to black students than white students of equal achievement and merit.
Here is how Inside Higher Ed describes it: "The new paper in fact is based on a study that set out to replicate one of the last major studies to do so -- a paper published in the Harvard Educational Review in 2003, strongly attacked by the College Board -- and the new paper confirms those results (but using more recent SAT exams). [....]
"The focus of both studies is on questions that show "differential item functioning," known by its acronym DIF. A DIF question is one on which students "matched by proficiency" and other factors have variable scores, predictably by race, on selected questions. A DIF question has notable differences between black and white (or, in theory, other subsets of students) whose educational background and skill set suggest that they should get similar scores. The 2003 study and this year's found no DIF issues in the mathematics section.
"But what Freedle found in 2003 has now been confirmed independently by the new study: that some kinds of verbal questions have a DIF for black and white students. On some of the easier verbal questions, the two studies found that a DIF favored white students. On some of the most difficult verbal questions, the DIF favored black students. [....]
"While the studies found gains for both black and white students on parts of the SAT, the white advantage is larger such that the studies suggest scores for black students are being held down by the way the test is scored and that a shift to favor the more difficult questions would benefit black test-takers."
The study they are describing hits close to home:
"The new study is based on data for students who enrolled at the University of California system across several administrations of the SAT [....]"
Note carefully what is being said about the DIF on verbal portions of the SAT: white students tend to get higher scores than black students of comparable academic merit. Ponder that for a minute.
Considering Race to Reduce Racial Bias
An admissions officer is confronted by a variety of objective and subjective facts about an applicant. Applications include objective facts like test scores, transcripts, and grade point averages. Subjectively, they include recommendations, personal statements and so forth. This data is used to filter through applications and determine who should be sent application letters.
The two studies from the Harvard Education Review tell us that, at least in the case of verbal SAT scores, scores can not be meaningfully compared without considering the races of the applicants.
In fact, to ignore race when considering a lower or higher verbal SAT score is to build a pro-white bias into admissions, giving white students a preference over black students of equal merit.
We might hope that, ultimately, the College Board will improve the SAT test and its scoring methods to eliminate this racial bias - but that is not likely to happen anytime soon. In fact, it might not even be possible: no culturally neutral verbal test has yet been invented.
If the UC system is prohibited from considering race when, for example, interpreting verbal SAT scores admissions will not be color blind - it will simply be skewed in favor of whites. If someone wants to hold a bakesale reflecting the status quo that SB185 seeks to correct, it's whites who should get the unfair discount.
Teachers who fail minority students don’t tend to last long.
Teachers have been taken to court for being too tough on grades, guess which side the unions take. Teachers have been ordered by court to raise grades, been there.
Note to self, go to bed before you make disjointed comments.
Sounds like I was the recipient of the court ordered grade.
Night.
Race should have no legal baring on anything.
Is “legal baring” what occurs when a lawyer displays his briefs?
““The study found that, yes, SATs tend to give lower scores to black students than white students of equal achievement and merit.””
And what other test did they use to determine that they were “of equal achievement and merit.” I thought that’s what the SAT was for.
Actually affirmative action is worse than typical racism. Why is that?
Because Affirmative Action is STATE SANCTIONED RACISM. Racism with fascist overtones.
It’s unbelievable that the Liberal swine just don’t see how racist/fascist they are.
Ridicule through satire is effective and easily recognized by most.
To spell it out, the SAT questions aren’t biased, and the fake question makes fun of the whole idea.
Exactly. Let’s also do some track and field affirmative action since Blacks dominate it so the playing field can be leveled. Since Whitey can’t run as fast Black people have Whitey started ahead of them.
So racism practiced by A against B,C, and D is BAD, but racism is GOOD when practiced by B and C against A and B? What happens if you have other combinations? Is that good or bad racism? I am confused, but then I'm not a liberal who's got this all straight in his or her thinking . . . not.
Rhetorical question: Why are such colossal piles of glittering ignorance allowed to vote and to breed? Talk about the dumbing down of society by the “best and brightest”.
The amazing thing about this is that these idiot Libs don’t see they are being made fun of by the whole event, and just see this as another opportunity to quash 1A protest speech. So “liberal”, another perfectly good word ruined by the Left, much like “gay”.
Fox News story on this http://video.foxnews.com/v/1184891495001/fox-news-debuts-new-election-technology/?playlist_id=86858#/v/1185209797001/racist-bake-sale-or-statement-on-affirmative-action/?playlist_id=87485
LOL. I hate homophones!
Impy, I always suspected that you were homophonicphobic. : )
They can be torcher.
Ewe cant mien et.
Thank you. You get it.
It’s a joke. Irony for the sake of levity. Lighten up.
You’re welcome, and I try.
And when I don’t, I admit same and apologize. Did that recently in another thread, even though part of the problem was that the poster I was responding to didn’t make clear he was quoting another post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.