The Supremes

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

3 hours ago, babysdaddy said:

Is he wrong?  

He’s been wrong before.

[Sawbonz 27547]

45 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

As a related aside, a group, which does not need a hand up, but is also discriminated against, is high achieving women in higher education.  When my boys were applying for school, one of the jokes is the worst demographic to be in if you wanted to go to an elite school is "East Coast Becky"  ECB is vice president of student council, captain of the field hockey squad, first chair of the clarinets, and lead in the high school play. Becky is from an East Coast state with garbage public higher ed, like Maryland or New Jersey, and desperately wants to go to Stanford or Michigan, but she definitely doesn't want to go to Smith or Bryn Mawr.

Her opposite, who does get a hand up, so the class isn't 75% women, is literally any chump with a Y chromosome. 

No one is getting into Stanford or Michigan as just a chump w a Y chromosome. 
 

the problem here as someone mentioned upstream is 20 to 50 or more applicants with essentially the same creds applying for every 1 spot at the elite schools. Take out the legacy spots and it’s worse. My daughter graduated last spring and she was 3rd in her class at a very competitive public HS. She was within 1/1000 of a grade point of the valedictorian. Top 3 were women and the next 3 were men and there was a couple hundredths of a point between 1 and 6. All were >99th percentile on SAT and ACT. All had insane extracurriculars, community service hours, worked part time jobs etc on top of that. This occurs at thousands of schools across the country every year  

 

I’m at the point where just put all the kids above a minimum GPA/SAT combo in a lottery and choose the class at random

 

 

 

[tchookem 3900]

Trump’ presidency shaped the country for the foreseeable future. Wild. 

Yay?

[immamac 42841]

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

No one is getting into Stanford or Michigan as just a chump w a Y chromosome. 
 

the problem here as someone mentioned upstream is 20 to 50 or more applicants with essentially the same creds applying for every 1 spot at the elite schools. Take out the legacy spots and it’s worse. My daughter graduated last spring and she was 3rd in her class at a very competitive public HS. She was within 1/1000 of a grade point of the valedictorian. Top 3 were women and the next 3 were men and there was a couple hundredths of a point between 1 and 6. All were >99th percentile on SAT and ACT. All had insane extracurriculars, community service hours, worked part time jobs etc on top of that. This occurs at thousands of schools across the country every year  

 

I’m at the point where just put all the kids above a minimum GPA/SAT combo in a lottery and choose the class at random

 

 

 

It's almost like school doesn't make a fuck or something. 

[Js1 85313]

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

It's almost like school doesn't make a fuck or something. 

Well you did go to Dingleberry State

[immamac 42841]

Just now, Js1 said:

Well you did go to Dingleberry State

You are furthering my point. 

[Sawbonz 27547]

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

It's almost like school doesn't make a fuck or something. 

I think it does if your ultimate goal is the supreme court or the upper reaches of the federal government. Which is a whole separate issue IMO. 

[The Original Greaser Bob 2830]

Harvard was my safety school.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33869]

24 minutes ago, C-Man said:

It's not already? 🤣

this caused me to do a quick lookup and yup, it's about as you'd expect. 
https://accountability.tamu.edu/all-metrics/mixed-metrics/student-demographics

great time to be a dude on campus
https://www.utexas.edu/about/facts-and-figures

[The Original Greaser Bob 2830]

28 minutes ago, horn4life said:

Honestly I don't like race based admissions, but only because I view poverty to be the criteria that is a better gauge of need.  

I believe that whatever party thoroughly embraces this and in fact funds this approach would dominate politics for a few decades.

[Voldemort86 2259]

This opinion probably won’t be popular, but I agree with Thomas and Alito dickheads on this one.

we’ve all heard of this scenario playing out in one way or another :

white kid, black kid, and Asian kid are all good students with good grades. White kid and Asian kid get 1600 on their SAT. Black kid gets 1300 on his SAT.  Asian and white kid rejected by Yale and black kid accepted to Yale for “diversity” purposes. 
 

Schools should accept people based on merit and their qualifications. Hell….. jobs should do the same. There should be no crutch for minorities. You’re just hurting non-rich / connected white peoples by propping these minorities up.

[Sawbonz 27547]

UT had about 40k UG when I matriculated in 1988. They have 41k now 

Texas had about 17M people in 1988 and 31+M now. That’s a real problem 

[Michael Knight 12977]

1 hour ago, CooterBrown said:

The chef's kiss will be a reduction in white admissions as universities start using socio-economic and other non-race based criteria to assure a well rounded incoming class. I'd bet the GQP starts screaming for race based admissions within a decade.

 

A few will do that but most will no longer follow any criteria in admissions and just take the best available white men.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33869]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

UT had about 40k UG when I matriculated in 1988. They have 41k now 

Texas had about 17M people in 1988 and 31+M now. That’s a real problem 

so you're saying we need a yearly purge. I'm in!

[Michael Knight 12977]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

UT had about 40k UG when I matriculated in 1988. They have 41k now 

Texas had about 17M people in 1988 and 31+M now. That’s a real problem 

Texas needs a more robust university system like Californias but its Texas so they won't. 

[Bateshorn 9927]

15 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

No one is getting into Stanford or Michigan as just a chump w a Y chromosome. 
 

the problem here as someone mentioned upstream is 20 to 50 or more applicants with essentially the same creds applying for every 1 spot at the elite schools. Take out the legacy spots and it’s worse. My daughter graduated last spring and she was 3rd in her class at a very competitive public HS. She was within 1/1000 of a grade point of the valedictorian. Top 3 were women and the next 3 were men and there was a couple hundredths of a point between 1 and 6. All were >99th percentile on SAT and ACT. All had insane extracurriculars, community service hours, worked part time jobs etc on top of that. This occurs at thousands of schools across the country every year  

 

I’m at the point where just put all the kids above a minimum GPA/SAT combo in a lottery and choose the class at random

 

 

 

I had a good friend whose brother worked Admissions at Princeton before heading off to law school.  He told me one year they let in all the qualified tuba applicants because they were graduating a bunch of tubas.  He said that after some point, there is literally no difference between the applications, so you start doing shit like that. 

So yes, a random lottery is probably appropriate for the top 10 schools once you set the pool.  

I was being reductive and jokey about Y chromosomes, but my point about gender still stands:  one you get outside the Top 20 universities, and the Top 10 liberal arts, balancing the gender in your class starts becoming an issue,  Men just don't apply and go to higher Ed in the same numbers. 

[Gengs1 2583]

9 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

this caused me to do a quick lookup and yup, it's about as you'd expect. 
https://accountability.tamu.edu/all-metrics/mixed-metrics/student-demographics

great time to be a dude on campus
https://www.utexas.edu/about/facts-and-figures

UT has 12% more women then men, 55.9% to 44.1%, or close to 5k more women. Must be nice to be a dude there 

[Sawbonz 27547]

2 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

This opinion probably won’t be popular, but I agree with Thomas and Alito dickheads on this one.

we’ve all heard of this scenario playing out in one way or another :

white kid, black kid, and Asian kid are all good students with good grades. White kid and Asian kid get 1600 on their SAT. Black kid gets 1300 on his SAT.  Asian and white kid rejected by Yale and black kid accepted to Yale for “diversity” purposes. 
 

Schools should accept people based on merit and their qualifications. Hell….. jobs should do the same. There should be no crutch for minorities. You’re just hurting non-rich / connected white peoples by propping these minorities up.

Well, as a non-rich white kid who only got a little over 1300 on my SAT, I spent my undergraduate, graduate, and post graduate years dominating peers of all races who got 1500 to 1600. Of course many of them did better than I did, and some with lower scores thrashed us all.  
 

It’s kind of a ridiculous arbitrary measuring stick for actual academic and professional ability. Especially since you can take courses to improve your score. Many of the private schools actually have prep courses as part of the formal curriculum. And their parents send them to Kaplan etc and hire private tutors on top of that

[Huckleberry 32855]

8 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

we’ve all heard of this scenario playing out in one way or another :

white kid, black kid, and Asian kid are all good students with good grades. White kid and Asian kid get 1600 on their SAT. Black kid gets 1300 on his SAT.  Asian and white kid rejected by Yale and black kid accepted to Yale for “diversity” purposes. 

Have we? Or did you just make something up? 

['stache 21805]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

Have we? Or did you just make something up? 

Six justices of the US Supreme Court think that's how it works, so it doesn't matter that it isn't true, it's true enough for the kangaroo court. 

[Gengs1 2583]

1 minute ago, Bateshorn said:

I had a good friend whose brother worked Admissions at Princeton before heading off to law school.  He told me one year they let in all the qualified tuba applicants because they were graduating a bunch of tubas.  He said that after some point, there is literally no difference between the applications, so you start doing shit like that. 

So yes, a random lottery is probably appropriate for the top 10 schools once you set the pool.  

I was being reductive and jokey about Y chromosomes, but my point about gender still stands:  one you get outside the Top 20 universities, and the Top 10 liberal arts, balancing the gender in your class starts becoming an issue,  Men just don't apply and go to higher Ed in the same numbers. 

We need to start looking at increasing men attendance to universities

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/

[Js1 85313]

2 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Well, as a non-rich white kid who only got a little over 1300 on my SAT, I spent my undergraduate, graduate, and post graduate years dominating peers of all races who got 1500 to 1600. Of course many of them did better than I did, and some with lower scores thrashed us all.  
 

It’s kind of a ridiculous arbitrary measuring stick for actual academic and professional ability. Especially since you can take courses to improve your score. Many of the private schools actually have prep courses as part of the formal curriculum. And their parents send them to Kaplan etc and hire private tutors on top of that

Exactly, those white kids have the opportunity to do better on the tests.  They take the courses, hire tutors, etc.  $$$$$$$ gives them the leg up. 

Just reducing it down as "dumb black kid gets in over smart white kids for DiVerSitY" is some Uncle Ruckus bullshit. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Js1

[Bateshorn 9927]

1 minute ago, Gengs1 said:

We need to start looking at increasing men attendance to universities

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/

That's my point about East Coast Becky.  The further from the top 10 you get the more schools have to start accepting lower qualified men than women in order to keep some gender diversity.  As my wife put it:  not every girl want to be consigned to four years of 'experimenting with girls" because the talent pool of male applicants was so poor.

[Dahobbs 17534]

15 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

This opinion probably won’t be popular, but I agree with Thomas and Alito dickheads on this one.

we’ve all heard of this scenario playing out in one way or another :

white kid, black kid, and Asian kid are all good students with good grades. White kid and Asian kid get 1600 on their SAT. Black kid gets 1300 on his SAT.  Asian and white kid rejected by Yale and black kid accepted to Yale for “diversity” purposes. 
 

Schools should accept people based on merit and their qualifications. Hell….. jobs should do the same. There should be no crutch for minorities. You’re just hurting non-rich / connected white peoples by propping these minorities up.

Ah yes, we should definitely make policy decisions based upon what "we've all heard." I believe Trump made that part of his platform with the infamous "people are saying" mantra. The result of this decision isn't just the elimination of affirmative action, but elimination of tracking race as an element of admissions at all. If you're school ends up being 100% white, well, too bad to everybody else. You can't go looking into why that is and try to fix it. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Dahobbs

[Michael Knight 12977]

3 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

We need to start looking at increasing men attendance to universities

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/

Why would they go to school? Its easier to get a job as a man with no qualifications especially in tech.

[babysdaddy 2721]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Yes.  Until they nix legacy admissions, yes, he's wrong.  The math is fucking glaring.

Legacy admissions favor applicants whose family have a history of attending an institution.  Until approximately 50 years ago (and less, with respect to many institutions), those institutions actually or functionally discriminated against minority students.  And shit, until present day (but at least well into the 70s and 80s), the lower level education apparatus available to minority students was generally inferior to that available to white students.  But let's just go with the fact that there was open discrimination 50 years ago.  That means that when you're looking back in time for a family history.....a white applicant might have such history.  A minority candidate will have a much, much, MUCH lower chance of such history.

Because of our long history of discrimination -- which is not disputed, even by the SCOTUS in this decision -- legacy admissions are a mechanism that guarantee a discriminatory outcome in favor of white applicants.

A policy of "we don't consider race anymore....we just consider whether your granddad went here [back when we were racist and didn't let black folks in, so we know your granddad was white]" is indisputably racist.  Yet it remains intact.

And by the way....I actually don't have a problem with "legacy" being a FACTOR in admissions decisions, especially for private institutions - it's a pathway to greater donations and revenue, which is a material consideration for a university.  However, to balance that, other factors need to come into play, including the race of applicants who are of races who were historically discriminated against and thus are much less likely to have legacy status.

As is the case with this court with some frequency, it sees only what it wants to see, and turns a blind eye to the rest.

100% agree regarding your legacy admissions screed.  But that wasn't before the Court. And it was the Asian kids getting fucked in this deal.

[YGIFS 19450]

^

Go on about Becky and her quadmates.  

The same people who argue there needs to be more males in college also claim college is overrated and males should learn a trade instead.  I don't get it.  

But yeah, in another generation, this is gonna be a big problem for dating/marital purposes afterwards.  Men don't mind marrying a non-college girl.  Most women won't marry a non-college guy these days.  And then we gotta hear moaning about the population decline as a result.  

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Exactly, those white kids have the opportunity to do better on the tests.  They take the courses, hire tutors, etc.  $$$$$$$ gives them the leg up. 

Just reducing it down as "dumb black kid gets in over smart white kids for DiVerSitY" is some Uncle Ruckus bullshit. 

Also, racial biases in testing is a thing. 

[Mole 4330]

7 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

 He told me one year they let in all the qualified tuba applicants because they were graduating a bunch of tubas. 

Princeton TubaChristmas needs numbers to spread TubaChristmas cheer. The Harvey Phillips Foundation isn’t interested in playing games.

[tx 3 putt 76908]

9 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

UT had about 40k UG when I matriculated in 1988. They have 41k now 

Texas had about 17M people in 1988 and 31+M now. That’s a real problem 

Sooner or later, does ut ausitn have a plan on growing ?

[Gengs1 2583]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Exactly, those white kids have the opportunity to do better on the tests.  They take the courses, hire tutors, etc.  $$$$$$$ gives them the leg up. 

Just reducing it down as "dumb black kid gets in over smart white kids for DiVerSitY" is some Uncle Ruckus bullshit. 

Another thing to consider is that educated parents care more about their kids education and spend more time with them, helping, teaching etc. poor folks just aren’t as involved or don’t push their kids towards eduction. You can see that in school with how kids behave, respect of teachers etc. 

Some Immigrant parents push education really hard on their kids 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Gengs1

[Biff Tannen 45676]

5 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

As my wife put it:  not every girl want to be consigned to four years of 'experimenting with girls" because the talent pool of male applicants was so poor.

Nowhouhavemyattention.gif

[Sawbonz 27547]

1 minute ago, tx 3 putt said:

Sooner or later, does ut ausitn have a plan on growing ?

Well, I hear we are building a new football practice facility

[tx 3 putt 76908]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Well, I hear we are building a new football practice facility

new locker rooms !

[Michael Knight 12977]

1 minute ago, tx 3 putt said:

Sooner or later, does ut ausitn have a plan on growing ?

No, they have too many students not enough professors as it is. What UT needs is better options in its University system, 0 reason why UT Dallas or UT El Paso can't be as good a school as Austin. The money is there but the willingness to invest in the future isn't. The slapdicks in our government know that keeping Texas dumb is better for their re-election

[The Original Greaser Bob 2830]

23 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

Schools should accept people based on merit and their qualifications.

The problem is, different schools have different missions.  Why should I base merit on what someone has earned up to his 18th birthday.  Maybe with some maturing he will be a star.  And qualifications for what?  To be a good citizen?  To make a shitload of money that he will give back to the school?  

So many people just opine that admissions should be based on such a leaky definition of "merit and qualification". 

I do think that with a relatively objective criteria like "economic need", we can accomplish what we want to in terms of diversity and inclusion.  This country has proven itself irredeemable in terms of understanding the history and nuance of race.  I think we can handle disparate treatment laws -- lets use those and start increasing opportunity via aggressive, straighforward needs based funding. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33869]

17 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

UT has 12% more women then men, 55.9% to 44.1%, or close to 5k more women. Must be nice to be a dude there 

isn't that what I said?

anyway, contrast that with almost 5k more dudes at aggy and yeah, I don't think the two schools could be much more different

[Brisketexan 105097]

15 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

We need to start looking at increasing men attendance to universities

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/

We actually do, for broad social reasons.

As a society, we have long failed minorities (starting with actively discriminating against them for centuries).  Today, we are failing our young men.  The outcome is not good or healthy for us, in the long-term.  There's a massive re-thinking of our education apparatus across the board that needs to happen....but we're not very good at such thinking.

[Pancho 44759]

28 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

This opinion probably won’t be popular, but I agree with Thomas and Alito dickheads on this one.

we’ve all heard of this scenario playing out in one way or another :

white kid, black kid, and Asian kid are all good students with good grades. White kid and Asian kid get 1600 on their SAT. Black kid gets 1300 on his SAT.  Asian and white kid rejected by Yale and black kid accepted to Yale for “diversity” purposes. 
 

Schools should accept people based on merit and their qualifications. Hell….. jobs should do the same. There should be no crutch for minorities. You’re just hurting non-rich / connected white peoples by propping these minorities up.

This is a made up scenario. No we all haven’t heard something like this but keep making shit up if you want.

[Js1 85313]

Just now, Pancho said:

This is a made up scenario. No we all haven’t heard something like this but keep making shit up if you want.

Charlie Kirk and I heard it in a hipster coffee shop. Everyone was talking about it. 

[Sawbonz 27547]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

We actually do, for broad social reasons.

As a society, we have long failed minorities (starting with actively discriminating against them for centuries).  Today, we are failing our young men.  The outcome is not good or healthy for us, in the long-term.  There's a massive re-thinking of our education apparatus across the board that needs to happen....but we're not very good at such thinking.

I worry much more about my sons than my daughters. If you told me when they were babies I would feel this way I would say you were crazy

[YGIFS 19450]

18 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Texas needs a more robust university system like Californias but its Texas so they won't. 

Yeah, the UT System is trying its level best.  As a result, UT-Dallas, UT-Arlington, and UT-San Antonio have improved and grown by leaps and bounds.  UT-RGV and UT-El Paso are solid regional universities.  And UT-PB, UT-Tyler and now SFA will be the same in their neck of the woods.  But most system schools get funding in the nominal sense from the state, just enough to remain public universities (~12%).  The other state systems are content servicing their little slice of Texas and that's about it.  
For all we brag about Texas being better than California, the chasm in higher education is just staggering.  The worst Cal State campus is better than 80% of our higher ed institutions.  

I don't remember if it's actually written into the law, but a huge flex of the Top 10% rule when it was debated and passed was that it would improve ethnic and racial diversity as kids from overwhelmingly high schools of color would have access to better universities.  This was done to appease Legislators of Color back then.  The same incentives were made to rural legislators with not terribly well-known high schools.  But if there's anything in that bill that even hints at ethnic diversity, not AA, but racial/demographic diversity.........it's gonna have to go away now and it's open season on the admissions process again.  

[Pancho 44759]

15 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

Another thing to consider is that educated parents care more about their kids education and spend more time with them, helping, teaching etc. poor folks just aren’t as involved or don’t push their kids towards eduction. You can see that in school with how kids behave, respect of teachers etc. 

Some Immigrant parents push education really hard on their kids 

I don’t know what your purpose on this thread is, but this is yet another shitty ass take that you’re wrong about again.

My worst students teaching in college were the students who came from wealthy, college educated households. Those students were more likely to be disrespectful especially because they always believed they deserved an A on every single assignment regardless of the quality. And then you’re stereotyping poor Americans by saying they just aren’t as involved and that isn’t true. As a Black American growing up in small town Texas, we definitely weren’t even middle class but my parents and grandparents were heavily involved in my education and me going to college. You people keep denigrating poor (who are more than likely to be Black and Latino) students is a shit take but right on par with your group. 

['stache 21805]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

I don’t know what your purpose on this thread is, but this is yet another shitty ass take that you’re wrong about again.

My worst students teaching in college were the students who came from wealthy, college educated households. Those students were more likely to be disrespectful especially because they always believed they deserved an A on every single assignment regardless of the quality. And then you’re stereotyping poor Americans by saying they just aren’t as involved and that isn’t true. As a Black American growing up in small town Texas, we definitely weren’t even middle class but my parents and grandparents were heavily involved in my education and me going to college. You people keep denigrating poor (who are more than likely to be Black and Latino) students is a shit take but right on par with your group. 

A lot of poor people (minorities being disproportionally subject to poverty) can't exactly help as much when they work 3 jobs just to keep a roof and obtain food. There are so many studies out there about the holistic problems poverty presents in every aspect of life in ways that many people don't even consider. Free time to spend with kids and to read to them and help with their homework is pretty high on the list. 

[YChang 3443]

I definitely did not fit the model minority myth. I was horribad at math. Instead I excelled in art and various humanities subjects. 
 

I was not well prepared at all when I went to Texas. And the counselors were not very good. So I really admire all who graduated. I wish there was more resources to help me out like there are now. I promptly flunked out my 2nd year. 
 

Attempt number two this fall… going back for graduate degree. 

[Brisketexan 105097]

6 minutes ago, Pancho said:

I don’t know what your purpose on this thread is, but this is yet another shitty ass take that you’re wrong about again.

My worst students teaching in college were the students who came from wealthy, college educated households. Those students were more likely to be disrespectful especially because they always believed they deserved an A on every single assignment regardless of the quality. And then you’re stereotyping poor Americans by saying they just aren’t as involved and that isn’t true. As a Black American growing up in small town Texas, we definitely weren’t even middle class but my parents and grandparents were heavily involved in my education and me going to college. You people keep denigrating poor (who are more than likely to be Black and Latino) students is a shit take but right on par with your group. 

Well, you're also using the anecdotal to refute the statistical.  Yes, there are plenty of kids from wealthy households who are dumbasses/slackers destined for failure.  And yes, there are plenty of minority kids from poorer families who have good family support and involvement, and who will end up successful in large part thanks to that.

But as a matter of statistics, give me 100 kids who are zoned for Highland Park and 100 kids who are zoned for Dallas Carter, and I'm going to find a lot more kids capable of success at the university level from the first group.  I'm not saying that's a reflection on the kids, their innate ability, or anything like that.  I'm saying that kids from poorer households are less likely to have the mentoring, examples, support, and even basic life security (a safe home, good nutrition) than kids from richer households.  This isn't exactly a radical observation.

Which is why I mentioned that we need to re-think our entire education apparatus, and we need to realize that the path to success starts a helluva lot sooner than your freshman year at university.   Having an admissions process that tries to adjust and compensate for opportunity is but one element of the solution. 

[David Dennison 18854]

When will they do something about affirmative action for white people, AKA legacy admissions?

[Pancho 44759]

37 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

We need to start looking at increasing men attendance to universities

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/

 

Once again, a shitty ass take. It’s not that men aren’t being admitted in the same as women. The research shows men AREN’T GOING TO COLLEGE THE SAME RATE AS WOMEN. Essentially, nearly every college/university (2 year or 4 year) in America has more women than men admitted because more women are going to college and see higher education as a value. The research shows and has been telling us for years that men just aren’t going to college as much. This has been a known to us for over a decade. It’s not new.

[YGIFS 19450]

From the outset, our pre-college leadership Academy for students of color knew we couldn't out-and-out ask for ethnicity/race.  It's only about 1000 students but that's a decent sample size for most mid-sized universities.  Technically, it's run out of UT so we have to comply with most of their application practices regarding personal information and the like.  But since at 50-70% of the students attending don't go on to UT (actually even better schools which is awesome to see, I don't mind being snubbed for Stanford or Georgetown), we were given some leeway in the application.  So after about 10 years of tinkering, we've got it down pretty cold---zip code, high school data (about the school itself), first in their family to go to college, family income, number of hours working outside of school, and a word scanner that goes through their essays to look for mentions of race, ethnicity, immigration status, etc. 

The way to do this has been around for awhile but we couldn't use any off-the-shelf models because again, it's not allowed by UT.  So we had to conveniently arrive at it organically as a group of mostly volunteers with only 2 FTE's.  Because of this our last 6-7 classes have been exactly what we wanted them to be 90% student of color, 90% first gen, 90% from households 20% above poverty line, 90% in the Top 10% of their public high school class, and 60/40 female/male. 

 

If my dumbass can figure out how to do this, entire college systems will have it figured out, if they haven't already.  You can game it too to ensure that working class white kids make it through too.  Race was never the sole criterium.  The truly qualified, regardless of color, can still make it through.  Just gonna take some workarounds with the process.  

[Satchel 6938]

Houston, Texas State and UNT may be the only big state universities that have black student populations that hover around 10%. This is in a state which has the largest black population in the country. 
 

I guess these numbers are a bridge too far for our color blind Supreme Court.