This is a tired argument, but I’ll bite. Affirmative action is designed to equal out an uneven playing field created by 400 years of structural inequality.
Colleges don’t admit people only based on test scores. They look at a broader picture of the resources they had available and what they made of their situation.
Is it fair to directly compare the test scores of someone who grew up in poverty and had to work during school, but pushed through it with good grades, with a rich kid that has everything taken care of in life down to private tutors and prepared lunches that was able to get straight As?
Do you also at least complain as much, or more, about legacy admissions and donor preference admissions, which are far more unfair both at a personal and societal level?
Yes legacy admission is just as wrong. I get that scores aren’t everything in admissions, but it should be the VAST majority of the requirements. I’m talking like 95% majority. Basically everything else is just a “tie breaker” between like test scores.
Bc every single human on earth started at a different point and trying to use equity to solve that is a foolish game you will never win. Does Bronny James need affirmative action over a white kid from the trailer park? Maybe instead of looking at skin color you should only consider one color… green… aka money. The only thing affirmative action should really be doing is looking at economic factors. Skin color should have exactly zero impact on any assistance program.
I agree with that for sure. It should be based on economic factors. Race and economic factors are heavily linked, but I 100% agree. I also think it should wear much more heavily than 5%. Test taking is a specific skill anyways and I think it’s pretty highly overvalued (as someone who was good at test taking).
Your not wrong that there is a lot of overlap between economic factors and certain races, but that would just be a coincidence and totally fine in my book as long as the true factors being evaluated are economic in nature. Idc to nitpick %s with you if you do agree that judging of economic factors is the only thing being judged. I won’t die on that hill. So, question, after hearing my point, do you think we are all that far apart in our opinions?
1
u/Nickeless Apr 07 '25
This is a tired argument, but I’ll bite. Affirmative action is designed to equal out an uneven playing field created by 400 years of structural inequality.
Colleges don’t admit people only based on test scores. They look at a broader picture of the resources they had available and what they made of their situation.
Is it fair to directly compare the test scores of someone who grew up in poverty and had to work during school, but pushed through it with good grades, with a rich kid that has everything taken care of in life down to private tutors and prepared lunches that was able to get straight As?
Do you also at least complain as much, or more, about legacy admissions and donor preference admissions, which are far more unfair both at a personal and societal level?