Okay, now Bush is just flat out lying

[Zkribbler]

That more-diverse campuses better educate their students "is yet to be convincingly demonstrated," he acknowledges. "The research still needs to be done that would demonstrate the link." - Alexander W. Astin, director of the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles

So Astin admits that more-diverse campuses better educate their students has been demonstrated...just not convincingly enough for Astin. But certainly, it has been adequatedly demonstrated to convince a number of people, including the Bakke Court. Also, education is far more than just book learning, it's also being exposed to people from varied backgrounds and cultures.

Also, Astin does not mention the lack of service provided by white graduates to minority communities.

[Jac de Molay]

You know very well that saying "minority enrollment has not dropped below 11%" is the furthest thing from proof that a quota exists. Next year, it could be 8%; what will the CIR say then? "Minority enrollment has never been below 8%--it must be a quota!"

On NPR the other day, The dean of the law school said the desired "critical mass" for minority enrollment "varied with the applicant pool".

I'm sorry, you can dress it up all you want, but a "critical mass" is still a quota. And just because it varies from semester to semester doesn't make it any less so. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

And since I'm a white dude living in Detroit, I fully expect Wayne State University or University of Detroit -Mercy to give ME 20 extra points when I apply to their business school. People like me comprise only 10% of the city's population. If not, I'm calling Al Sharpton.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And since I'm a white dude living in Detroit, I fully expect Wayne State University or University of Detroit -Mercy to give ME 20 extra points when I apply to their business school. People like me comprise only 10% of the city's population. If not, I'm calling Al Sharpton.

LOL

[Zkribbler]

People like me comprise only 10% of the city's population.

If it were only 10% of the student body, you'd have a much better argument.

[Jac de Molay]

Im still vastly underrepresented based on my particular gender and skin color. My contribution to the "diversity" of these schools' is still deserving of a few extra points.


I might even go to nursing school to pick up a few extra points for "Men in nursing", then switch majors.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DetroitDave
I might even go to nursing school to pick up a few extra points for "Men in nursing", then switch majors.

Most nursing schools do indeed seek to recruit more men.

I went to a school that was 70% female. They were constantly, aggressively pursuing males to make the student body more diverse so as to make the campus more attractive to perspective students, both male and female (would many girls really want to go to a college with few men?).

So was that wrong of the school?

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Which is why I mentioned the amendment process to the Constitution. I don't like ignoring parts of it when convenient.

I don't either. We both know it won't be amended, and I acknowledge that AA is on shaky constitutional ground. But do you honestly believe that people will be better off if AA is found unconstitutional?

Also, you didn't address the Bakke issue.

If you insist. The legal weight held by the portion of the Bakke case that UM seems to be holding a death grip on seems to be in doubt. Powell's portion of the splintered opinion which held that racial preferences was a constitutionally permissible way to iumprove education is shakey given that it was not endorsed by any other justice.

Fair enough; thanks for the info.

That more-diverse campuses better educate their students "is yet to be convincingly demonstrated," he acknowledges. "The research still needs to be done that would demonstrate the link." - Alexander W. Astin, director of the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles

Also fair enough; anecdotal evidence seems to demonstrate that diversity is indeed a plus on campuses. Of course, anecdotal evidence doesn't mean squat legally.


Now you haven't addressed the fact that poor whites are not at a disadvantage under the UM system... clever boy.

[uh Clem]

Actually...yes. Because police know that white people in those areas are usually...looking for something.

"those areas"??? Pardon me, your sheet is showing.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by DetroitDave


On NPR the other day, The dean of the law school said the desired "critical mass" for minority enrollment "varied with the applicant pool".

I'm sorry, you can dress it up all you want, but a "critical mass" is still a quota. And just because it varies from semester to semester doesn't make it any less so. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

That may very well be so. And if it is proven that the law school uses quotas, then I will absolutely be with you and the others on this thread.

(Apropos of nothing, I loved it when Bush adamantly denounced quotas. Good for you, George. That's like coming out in favor of toddlers and puppies. Horse's ass.)


As to your WSU & UDM argument--UDM is a private school, and thus a whole other ball of wax. As for Wayne State, I honestly don't know the demographics of the school--I know several of my classmates from Livonia went there after high school, but I've lost touch with them. (I know DetroitDave knows this, but the rest of you probably don't--by saying "several of my classmates from Livonia," it is understood that these are white kids. I believe, according to the most recent census, that Livonia--a suburb just outside of Detroit--is the whitest city in America, defined as having over 100,000 in population.)

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by uh Clem


"those areas"??? Pardon me, your sheet is showing.

Please explain.

[Jac de Molay]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Most nursing schools do indeed seek to recruit more men.

I went to a school that was 70% female. They were constantly, aggressively pursuing males to make the student body more diverse so as to make the campus more attractive to perspective students, both male and female (would many girls really want to go to a college with few men?).

So was that wrong of the school?

If it was a highly competitive private school, there's nothing wrong- It can do whatever it wants.

If it was a highly competitive public university like Michigan, and it's setting aside spaces to recruit males, there's plenty thats wrong. (and I dont support nursing for men programs).

By whatever means its using- achieving a "critical mass", extra points for admission, it is being discriminatory.

Good public Universities have an obligation reach out to all walks of life to recruit talent, but not on the basis of race, gender, creed, etc. . If the university was applying the same principals to attract, say, more people of one religion, all hell would break loose.

But the issue of race, by the same criteria, gets treated with kid gloves.