W*****d
发帖数: 4196 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
发信人: majia01 (Genuine Leather, Made in China), 信区: Military
标 题: Harvard and UNC sued over their admission policies
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Nov 17 15:17:52 2014, 美东)
http://news.yahoo.com/harvard-unc-sued-over-admission-policies- | k****m
发帖数: 4670 | | C*N
发帖数: 1792 | | u*****a
发帖数: 6276 | 4 这两个案子估计四、五年后到达美国最高法院的时候，才能决定输赢，因为有可能要把
以前美国最高法院的判决推翻；而其它低层法院无权更改美国最高法院的判决。费舍尔
一案的上诉会快一些。
Among the alternatives suggested in the Harvard case would be the
elimination of special admissions opportunities for the children of Harvard
alumni. About 30 percent of such “legacy” applicants are admitted, the
complaint said. That means that there is “a competitive advantage to
mainly white, wealth applicants, while undermining the chances for admission
of socioeconomically disadvantaged and minority applicants,” it added.
The complaint also contended that Harvard has a policy of giving preferences
to applicants whose parents make significant money contributions to the
university, and it suggested that “minority students are far less likely to
be children of wealth donors.
As to the Fisher case, on the 15th of July, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit announced its divided decision in the case of Fisher
vs. the University of Texas at Austin, which had been remanded to the Fifth
Circuit by the Supreme Court in the previous summer. In a 2-1 decision, the
Fifth Circuit found in favor of UT Austin. In its decision, the majority
wrote, “It is equally settled that universities may use race as part of a
holistic admissions program where it cannot otherwise achieve diversity.”
The court continued, “This interest is compelled by the reality that
university education is more the shaping of lives than the filling of heads
with facts — the classic assertion of the humanities.” As of July 22, 2014
, Fisher and associated parties planned to file an appeal, either for an en
banc hearing with the Fifth Circuit, or to return to the Supreme Court to
argue their case. | a*a
发帖数: 175 | 5 但愿我娃读书的时候不要因为是亚裔被歧视……
大家去看起诉书的原文吧，看看各位推娃推到吐，然后被哈佛华丽丽地歧视
http://studentsforfairadmissions.org/project-on-fair-representa
【在 W*****d 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
: 发信人: majia01 (Genuine Leather, Made in China), 信区: Military
: 标 题: Harvard and UNC sued over their admission policies
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Nov 17 15:17:52 2014, 美东)
: http://news.yahoo.com/harvard-unc-sued-over-admission-policies-
| a********1
发帖数: 664 | 6 应该捐款给这个组织.
【在 C*N 的大作中提到】
: good, 应该组织亚裔向这个组织捐款
| u*****a
发帖数: 6276 | 7 预测一下：光凭统计数字，不太可能赢得这场官司。这充其量是 discriminative
impact （if the Court buys it）。如果无法证明哈佛制定和实施录取规则（如果有
的话）的过程中有 discriminative intent，那么同样无法证明该录取规则是歧视性的。
每个申请者和被录取者都是独立的个体。被录取和被拒绝，可能差的就是毫厘之间。而
对于 financial donor 和 legacy family 照顾，估计最高法院也管不了。你想想那些
投到竞选中的各种钱就明白了：如出一辙！ | l******2
发帖数: 2994 | 8 美国的公立教育系统的管理方法有根本缺陷，以至于它做不到给每个新生代一个从新洗
牌的机会，而是资源的逐渐累积极化的过程，也就是拼爹的一个社会。
美国的公立学校的资金是来自每个县的财政收入，就是穷人堆里的学校没钱，生源不好
，老师没干劲，富人堆里学校不缺钱，家长起劲，老师干劲足。不同学校出来的学生，
即使天资相同还是有不同结果。明明应该是在早期教育进行平均资源分配，现在要推迟
到大学才执行，但是已经都晚了。那些受照顾的来自不好学区的学生，大学里2/3的感
到学业吃力，没有READY 好STEM课程。这个数据是我在一个常春腾的校报上看到的。就
业的时候，有些职业有DIVERSTY 要求，录取不合格的一些人，但是多数职场，还是看
实力，这时候，某些PROFILE就会默认为不合格。反过来看被照顾入学的人是对大学资
源的浪费。病根在美国立国时候的社区公民体系。一方面人投入社区但另一方面，门前
雪也只是扫到了邻里那里，以至于一个社区是天堂，旁边的社区就是跟住地域差不多。
在美国大城市生活过的人都有体会，大学录取政策其实是所有教育弊端的集中爆发而已
,病根不改，也没法改，争议就永远存在。无论在哪个学校念，增加自身实力是王道，
所以我觉得华人自己要有个大学，不是很多人都钱多花不出去吗，找他们。 | C*N
发帖数: 1792 | 9 社区中小学很多也是交上去然后平均的，不少所谓的差区，人均得教学经费实际上并不
少，主要还是父母，家庭教育，文化传统的原因
【在 l******2 的大作中提到】
: 美国的公立教育系统的管理方法有根本缺陷，以至于它做不到给每个新生代一个从新洗
: 牌的机会，而是资源的逐渐累积极化的过程，也就是拼爹的一个社会。
: 美国的公立学校的资金是来自每个县的财政收入，就是穷人堆里的学校没钱，生源不好
: ，老师没干劲，富人堆里学校不缺钱，家长起劲，老师干劲足。不同学校出来的学生，
: 即使天资相同还是有不同结果。明明应该是在早期教育进行平均资源分配，现在要推迟
: 到大学才执行，但是已经都晚了。那些受照顾的来自不好学区的学生，大学里2/3的感
: 到学业吃力，没有READY 好STEM课程。这个数据是我在一个常春腾的校报上看到的。就
: 业的时候，有些职业有DIVERSTY 要求，录取不合格的一些人，但是多数职场，还是看
: 实力，这时候，某些PROFILE就会默认为不合格。反过来看被照顾入学的人是对大学资
: 源的浪费。病根在美国立国时候的社区公民体系。一方面人投入社区但另一方面，门前
| u*****a
发帖数: 6276 | 10 雅虎评论：
The suit, however, is getting strong pushback from Asian American student
and civil rights organizations, who suspect that Students for Fair
Admissions—and its parent organization, Project for Fair Representation,
which is run by activist Edward Blum—are more interested in ending
affirmative action than making sure Asian American students get equal
treatment in college admissions. The lawsuit inspired a Twitter hashtag, #
IAmNotYourWedge, and a petition condemning the suit as a thinly veiled
conservative ploy.
“Conservatives desperate to shore up a shrinking, aging, mostly white base
are hoping to sink their hooks into anxious Asian American parents who, like
all parents, just want the best opportunities for their kids,” Cynthia Liu
, education advocate and founder of the K-12 News Network, said in an email
interview. “This lawsuit plays on fears, falsehoods, and scarcity-driven
and blinkered thinking.”
ReAppropriate, an Asian American culture and social justice blog, says Blum
’s “overt co-optation of the Asian American community” is “galling.”
According to ReAppropriate, Blum “purports to speak for the Asian American
community in the filing of his lawsuit. He purports to stand in defense of
the Asian American community against institutional racism from elite
universities. Blum forgets that a majority of Asian Americans simply do not
stand” with him.
The Students for Fair Admissions lawsuit, filed earlier this week, accuses
Harvard and the University of North Carolina of admitting substandard
minority applicants because of their race. In a statement on its website,
the Project for Fair Representation argues that publicly available data
shows that the two schools are in clear violation of a 2013 Supreme Court
ruling that says college admissions directors can only use “race-neutral”
standards when deciding who gets in.
The Project for Fair Representation’s statement goes further, suggesting
that practices at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are just the
tip of the iceberg.
“The discrimination against Asian-Americans…[is] emblematic of the
behavior of the vast majority of competitive colleges throughout the country
,” reads the statement.
Blum, who is the director of the Project for Fair Representation,
represented Abigail Fisher, a white student, in her successful anti–
affirmative action lawsuit against the University of Texas. He has placed
other schools across the country on notice by stating that the Harvard and
UNC suits “are the first of what are expected to be several similar
challenges to other competitive colleges that continue to unconstitutionally
use racial preferences in admission decisions.”
Even though the number of qualified Asian American students applying to
Harvard is up, said Blum, “public data shows that Harvard has purposefully
limited the percentage of Asian-American freshman it admits. In fact, the
number of Asian-Americans Harvard admits today is lower than it was 20 years
ago.”
Though Blum argues that the Asian American community is being treated
unfairly, however, a study by the Inter-university Consortium for Political
and Social Research shows that more than 63 percent of Asian Americans
support affirmative action, while less than 40 percent support ending it,
according to Diverse Magazine. And several civil rights groups, including
the Asian American Legal Foundation, filed briefs supporting affirmative
action in the Fisher case.
Nevertheless, there is some perception of bias against Asian American
students in college admissions: In 2012, according to a report by the
American Psychological Association, “the National Association for College
Admission Counseling documented that Asian students are convinced not to
identify their race/ethnicity box on applications to avoid potential biases
in admission to the nation’s top colleges.”
The report also details how Asian American students are often held hostage
to the "model minority" stereotype, requiring, on average, higher test
scores and better grades than blacks, whites, and Latinos in order to win
college admission.
“The term [model minority] implies that all Asians are hard working,
financially well off, high-achievers,” often neglecting their diversity,
according to the report. “This image…also attempts to silence Asians
regarding their difficulties and discrimination experiences. The truth is
most Asians are immigrants who face language struggles” while others, like
Vietnames, Hmong, and Laotians, tend to be poorer and have high dropout
rates.
In its blog post about the lawsuit, ReAppropriate alleges that Blum and the
Project for Fair Representation took it upon themselves to file the lawsuit
and recruited “just the right Asian” student to help humanize it. The post
includes screen shots of online ads featuring an Asian student with the
caption, “Were you denied admission to the University of North Carolina? It
may be because you’re the wrong race.” The ads are accompanied by a form
for a rejected student to fill out.
“The [Students for Fair Admissions] lawsuits come after over a year of
Edward Blum canvassing for ‘just the right Asian’: rejected applicants to
Harvard, Univeristy of North Carolina–Chapel Hill (UNC) and University of
Wisconsin–Madison,” wrote ReAppropriate. “Blum was looking for Asian
Americans willing to become the new Abigail Fisher: someone willing to be
exploited as the next public face of the affirmative action debate.”
ReAppropriate notes that Blum hasn’t named a student as a plaintiff in the
lawsuit, and doesn’t offer concrete evidence of a quota at Harvard “or
that it was the reason for the unnamed applicant’s rejection from the
school.”
At best, “the suit is largely conjecture, and based on the bizarre
presumption that high standardized test scores entitles an applicant to
admission to an elite university.”
Still, Blum’s case against the University of Texas reached the Supreme
Court, where a conservative majority has consistently ruled against race-
based college admissions. However, according to Liu, Blum’s Asian American
discrimination lawsuit misses two broader points: The Asian-Pacific Islander
community isn’t monolithic, and college should be for everyone.
“Let’s widen our views to have admissions officers recognize the vast
diversity within the APA community (which also includes poverty and low
educational attainment) and also expand our perspectives in the Asian
Pacific American community so that every state university is fully funded,
higher ed is affordable, and there are sufficient campuses in public higher
ed so every student who wants to can attend,” said Liu. | k******b
发帖数: 4501 | | t*******r
发帖数: 22634 | 12 属实，加州就是典型例子。
【在 C*N 的大作中提到】
: 社区中小学很多也是交上去然后平均的，不少所谓的差区，人均得教学经费实际上并不
: 少，主要还是父母，家庭教育，文化传统的原因
| b********t
发帖数: 5261 | |
|
