Yes and yes. I for one welcome efforts to increase diversity by looking at these other factors.
garrettw87
joined 2 years ago
I’m not so sure. I understand your cynicism but I don’t share it just yet.
Affirmation action mandates a historically and currently racist society to demonstrate commitment to end subversive racist policies.
Maybe, but with some amount of collateral damage that will never be truly avoidable, because it’s still a system explicitly based on race. Society can never fully heal under a system like that. It can make some progress, but that progress has arguably already been largely achieved and somewhat plateaued; continuing an upward trajectory now requires different tactics.
Declaring everyone equal under the law doesn’t begin to put forth the required effort to actually make the country a more equitable place.
That was true at one point, but a lot has changed since that time.
Probably going to get downvoted for this, but I tend to agree that AA, as it stood, had run its course. Getting rid of it now clears the way for new and better solutions.
When I read these excerpts from this article https://news.northeastern.edu/2023/06/29/supreme-court-affirmative-action/ - I get a strong sense that AA really just allowed schools to be lazy.
“Universities all across the country will begin to experiment with a whole variety of admissions techniques that are race-neutral in the sense that race is not an explicit factor, but not race-neutral in the sense that they’re intended to produce diversity,” says Jeremy R. Paul, a professor of law and former dean of the Northeastern University School of Law.
Paul says many universities are going to have to up their recruitment efforts, increase partnerships with community colleges and high-poverty high schools, and invest more in scholarships and financial aid.
“These are things that universities will want to do anyway, because they’re good things to do,” Paul says.
Dan Urman, director of the law and public policy minor at Northeastern, who teaches courses on the Supreme Court, says the ruling means that universities will have to redouble their efforts to maintain diverse student bodies. Urman says there are examples of states opting out of affirmative action policies to mixed results.
“My home state of California abolished affirmative action in 1996 in a vote called Proposition 209, and California universities spent a lot of time and resources recruiting, establishing programs,” he says. “They were able to get diversity, not back to where it was before … but let’s say they were able to avoid some of the worst predictions of what would happen to diversity.”
One potential solution to maintain diversity are so-called percentage plans, where students who graduate at the top of their classes at each respective high school are guaranteed spots in universities. The first percentage plan was signed into law in 1997 in Texas by then-Gov. George W. Bush. It permits any student from “a Texas public high school in the top 10% of his or her class to get into any Texas public college, without any SAT or ACT score.”
Same. I haven’t used it in ages, but I’ll never forget.
This is how the Fediverse is. That said, I’m pretty sure there is functionality being worked on in some way to accomplish exactly what you are looking for.
Just go to: https://kbin.social/m/startrek@startrek.website
And hit the + button at the top, followed by Add New Article, Add New Link, or whatever.
“Artemis” and “kbin” look the most professional to me. Nice work.
Wow, this is a juicy and compelling read.
No, I didn’t realize that. Sorry.
Waze editor here. Based on the article’s content, this post’s title is a bit of an overreaction. Google would be a fool to kill off a platform with more accurate street maps than its core platform, maintained by a vibrant group of volunteers, at least without creating or migrating those tools over to GMaps.
Sure, as long as Section 230 remains the law. There are those who want to dismantle it, unfortunately.