Nov 13, 2006
WSJ asks: ‘Is Admissions Bar Higher for Asians At Elite Schools?’ [part 1]
This is a ‘part 1′ because this is a very big very thorny issue which concerns affirmative action and much more. As such I will in the near future be writing a ‘part 2′ which directly addresses any AA-related concerns I’m having about this topic here… but for now, my understanding of the issue:
Pulitzer prize winner Daniel Golden wrote a piece about “whether elite colleges give Asian-American students a fair shake” in last Saturday’s Wall Street Journal. It focused specifically on the case of one Jian Li, a Chinese permanent legal resident who went to a NJ public school having emigrated at age 4. Mr. Li recently filed a complaint against Princeton University for rejecting him through the Dept. Education’s Office for Civil Rights; he is currently a freshman at Yale. (n.b., this is not a tort case, it is a complaint about what Li feels was discrimination.)
This is an issue that throws a lot of people off sometimes, because some people confuse a) Affirmative action with b) race-based discrimination. Private universities in the United States are not required to have the same ‘objective’ qualifications that businesses or real estate have; race discrimination is only happening if there a pattern (in this case acceptance / rejection) unique to one race or ethnicity on the basis of unfair (nonstandard) comparisons–hence the problem with Berkeley’s law program back in the early 90s, which took Asians out of the general pool and compared them against each other.
A quote from the article to start us off here:
The Office for Civil Rights initially rejected Mr. Li’s complaint due to “insufficient” evidence. Mr. Li appealed, citing a white high-school classmate admitted to Princeton despite lower test scores and grades. The office notified him late last month that it would look into the case.
His complaint seeks to suspend federal financial assistance to Princeton until the university “discontinues discrimination against Asian-Americans in all forms by eliminating race preferences, legacy preferences, and athlete preferences.” Legacy preference is the edge most elite colleges, including Princeton, give to alumni children. The Office for Civil Rights has the power to terminate such financial aid but usually works with colleges to resolve cases rather than taking enforcement action.
That more or less sets the stage, but doesn’t answer my biggest question about Mr. Li’s claims: Jian Li had a 2400 SAT I and excellent SAT IIs, but what else was there? He had good grades, so he was clearly academically qualified. Yet how else does he compare to this white applicant from his school that was accepted? Reading about this story, I just want more facts, and I can’t seem to find them anywhere. While considering the subjective criteria that Princeton and other elite U.S. schools use to gauge applicants, numbers alone are not enough to form a complete comparison.
Next question: Why did Li sue Princeton, rather than Penn, Stanford, MIT, or Harvard, all of which rejected him (unfairly, he felt) after wait listing him?
“He ultimately focused his complaint against Princeton after reading a 2004 study by three Princeton researchers concluding that an Asian-American applicant needed to score 50 points higher on the SAT than other applicants to have the same chance of admission to an elite university.”
I’ve read that study; it’s a perfectly good study, but it doesn’t negate the fact that at the ‘top-tier’ American schools stats are not the only thing being considered. This is why when affirmative action is banned in some public institutions, notably the University of California (which we have data for) the Asian-American enrollment goes up–these schools rely on stats alone much more than do these top schools.
So, here is what it looks like to me, at first glance: Li has a 2400 SAT and great stats overall, and is waitlisted at then rejected by lots of good schools before two also very great schools accept him (Yale and Caltech). What happens next I don’t understand. HYPSM are known to reject plenty of perfect scorers–where exactly the basis for discrimination comes in I don’t understand, because these schools do not operate on the basis of stats alone. They care about extracurricular and leadership and all these things. I can see a plausible concern in general, but not one stemming from his case alone.
“Ah,” you say, “they do care about those things, but perhaps they just use them as an excuse or subjective ‘reason’ to reject those applicants they feel are undesirable in too great a quantity–perhaps Asians are now in the same position that Jews once were!” See again Malcomb Gladwell’s old piece in the New Yorker on modern elite college admissions which alludes back to Jerome Karabel’s The Chosen (I keep plugging that book because it keeps being good!). We had an assembly speaker who brought this up when discussing bias in objective hiring–people find “excuses” to hire one candidate (towards the bias, i.e. Caucasian) regardless of whether that particular ‘excuse’ was being sought after in the applicant process (i.e., experience, or skill, or whatever difference can be found between the two candidates). But…
Not necessarily. Show me proof–show me the memos and letters we have from old college presidents and admissions folks saying that there were too many Jews enrolling–show me that for Asian-Americans. I don’t have the evidence of a technical, legal discrimination–though I am happy to see there are sort of inquiries being made about it.
However, this really only scratches the surface, because this is only looking at the purest facts I could find about the issue. There is a bigger issue–the social ramifications of this question, and how Mr. Li’s complaint jives with other proposals, initiatives, lobbying groups and so forth. The internet is buzzing about this article, actually. I’ll be writing more about it, but I was just trying to skirt the ‘AA good / bad’ question in this post and just talk about whether or not I thought Li necessarily had a case here. As an African American Jew, I think I have a slightly different perspective on this matter than Mr. Li or some of my peers. You’ll just have to wait a little bit to hear it…
Sam,
The WSJ article doesn’t go into enough detail to determine the merits of Li’s case, as you point out.
But the question of whether there is systematic discrimination against Asians at elite universities is not really in doubt. See the article below, and the quote from a former Stanford admissions officer about an internal study there. Note the applicants compared were (a) all unhooked and (b) comparable of *both* academic and leadership criteria. I doubt things are any different at Princeton.
http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/10/10/asian
Reider said he thought the article and the question of “Too Asian?” that it posed was “shameful” and said that he was “embarrassed” as an American that such a piece would appear today. He asked whether anyone would think of publishing an article called “Too Latino?” and compared the bias to the kind of bigotry that for decades limited the enrollment of Jewish students at top private universities. “This is a racist question,” he said.
He also said that the bias is real — and cited his experience in his previous job as part of the admissions office at Stanford University. There, he said, the office did a study some years ago in which it compared Asian and white applicants with the same overall academic and leadership rankings. The study was only of “unhooked kids,” meaning those with no extra help for being an alumni child or an athlete. The study found that comparably qualified white applicants were “significantly” more likely to be admitted than their Asian counterparts.
Oops, “comparable of” should be “comparable in” …
To do a reasonable study of this type (which I assume the Stanford people are capable of), one would group together applicants who are comparable according to the overall admission criteria (grades, scores, activities, etc.) and look for the effect (perhaps subconscious!) of ethnicity on the outcome.
According to the tables you link to in a previous post, only about 240 students per year in the entire country obtain a 2400 SAT I score. So, Li is a pretty exceptional kid. There are not *that* many perfect-scorers for the elite schools to reject
He had only 237 friends up there at 2400, that’s true. All the same, SAT Is are only useful to a point–there are plenty of studies about testing “ranges” per individual student, and that degree of variance per sitting has only gone up with the addition of the writing, making scores less useful in one respect. Above a certain point–well below 2400–more points are really just going to be bringing up a school’s ranking average, and not saying very much about a kid. At least, that’s what I hope–because I know plenty of people with scores lower than Li, lower than mine, who are just as smart.
My problem with the comparison to the situation faced by Jews–the one which PRECEDED the development of our subjective admissions, meant to keep Jews out– is that the selection criteria at that time were different than they were now, significantly. It makes the analogy feel slightly flawed, vaguely incomplete. I’m going to try to address it in part 2 so I can’t spoil my logic by giving it away early, but! : )
It’s Reider’s commentary, moreso than Golden’s tiptoeing, that I’m looking for (I’d forgotten about that piece… October seems so long ago). I want some hard evidence, I want the office of civil rights to turn up some juicy stuff. I’ll do some snooping tomorrow.
thanks so much for commenting and reading! (Everyone besides steve: you should go read steve’s blog, and subscribe to it just like me, because it is very cool)
Sam,
You are definitely right that any discrimination against Asians today pales in comparison to what Jews had to face earlier in the 20th century.
I would not be surprised if almost all of the anti-Asian effect is from subconscious stereotyping on the part of admissions people, or unintended consequences of other policies.
You are also correct that the SAT probably has limited ability to differentiate between students at the high end.
It will be very interesting to see what the Li cases dredges up!
One particularly ugly thing it seems to be dredging up right now is stereotypes… as evidenced by the conversation online in some places. See: College Confidential-> http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=260420
just gets nasty in some places.
Frankly, the whole issue of affirmative action leave me cold. I certainly do understand some preference being given for gender equality and geographic preferences. I can even understand Legacy preferences in order to raise more money from alumni. However, I can’t understand any preference or discrimination based on race.
As you note Sam, this certainly seems to be similar to what Jews experienced post WWII.
Yes, there is no explicit evidence such as emails and letters that Asians are being discriminated against because of their high number of qualified applicants. However, if one reviews the applicant pool at most top tier colleges and looks at the stats for those admitted, I would bet that for most top schools, Asians have to have better credentials than non-Asians. The Princeton study also reinforces this argument.
My problem with any racial profiling for admission is, “where does it end?” If too many qualified Jews or Catholics apply, should there be a plateau for them? Frankly, I think that using race in any way for admission opens a “Pandora’s Box” that I don’t think we, as a country want to have. It is also creating a major backlash in this country, which is why whenever there was a constitutional mandate to prohibit AA in State Schools, the mandate easily passed by the voters even with lower funding then provided by the pro-affirmative action folks.
I think it is time to end any affirmative action based on race. This includes racial preferences and includes eliminating higher plateaus for Asians.
Diversity for gender sprang up at these elite institutions on one basis, first and foremost–”good boys” didn’t want to go to a single-sex school. Valiant claims of equality were secondary, largely. For race, it was a slightly different matter. At the same time, there IS a genuine basis for race-based affirmative action–teams do better and accomplish more when the group is more diverse, both gender-wise and racially. Having more perspectives available translates into a greater pool of ideas–something with obvious value for higher education.
Personally, even if I ‘understand’ the purported rationale behind legacy / development admissions standards / practices, I resent it in a way I don’t affirmative action–not just because I won’t benefit in any way from legacy / development, because obviously I will wherever I go in the sense of lovely buildings and new research centers funded by donations. The race for ever-huger endowments at the top (see: stanford’s 4.5 billion capital campaign) is just disturbing. Offer FA for the poor, sure–get that socioeconomic diversity, that’s important too. The middle class gets squeezed there, unfortunately (that’s me!). But I care more about who is working with me in the lab–that it’s a diverse group–than whether or not the equipment is the absolute cutting edge. For research universities, it’s too easy to lose sight of that. But again, I think ideas come from people, and though having good toys and tools to enable their work is important, it is less important than that diversity.
But, ah, that’s just a snapshot of some of my feelings–sorry to rant a little bit. I was trying to paraphrase a nice assembly speaker we had a few weeks ago, a microbiologist from U Wisconsin… I have to look up her name again, I wasn’t able to find it last night when I was looking. She was talking about the value of diversity as demonstrated in controlled studies of workplaces, so forth. I think the same is true for learning environments, though I don’t know if there is raw data to back that up. It’s still a working environment, even if it is learning, so…
The reason many of these mandates pass sometimes, I think, is that AA tends to put minorities above majorities… and so when you have everyone vote, those majorities are going to be flexing their muscles and if they have short-term goals in mind (I want to get me / my son into college) well, we see what happens. That being said in the context of state schools AA is less… less reasonable sometimes, because it is translated into quantifiable characteristics–i.e., you’re black, you get x Admissions points, you’re white, -20, so forth. At least, that’s how it appears sometimes, and I don’t know that that is exactly in tune with the philosophy of AA as I like to imagine it.
BUT all this for another post. Man. I should write it faster, I guess.
Sam notes, “But I care more about who is working with me in the lab–that it’s a diverse group–than whether or not the equipment is the absolute cutting edge.”
Response: I am surprised that you feel this way. I would take cutting edge, top equipment over mediocre equipment ANYTIME over having a lot of other “diverse” researchers on the team.
Your attitude is astounding.
I can honestly say that I know of no parent that says to themselves,”I like this school for my kids because it is so diverse.” Maybe among African American parents the thought process is very different from what I think.
Bottom line: I want my kids to have access to the best, cutting edge equipment and best research professors around. If there is a diverse student body, fine;however, it will have no effect on my or my kid’s college decision process.
Sandy, I have to disagree with you. I’m not saying I would necessarily take “mediocre” equipment… obviously the hypothetical is necessarily unspecific, I’m afraid. I’m biracial, mind you–african american and jewish–so it isn’t just that I have “african american parents” if you were inferring that. Perhaps being biracial has made me more open minded even than some people just exposed to one ethnic group at home, I could not say.
But when I am looking at schools, diversity is of course an issue. However, these days, most places do a pretty good job attracting diverse student bodies–at the least, the very elite schools do an excellent job, though they continue to work to make it better.
A lab was also perhaps not the best of examples, as much science, math, tech is color blind (in the material, that is). However, from my own experience, there is a marked difference when I am discussing certain topics with a group of either a) nearly homogeneous people or b) a more diverse group.
Do you not value diversity beyond gender? I mean, gender is one thing right there–but so are economic means (bringing in poorer people, particularly) and ethnicity. I know that when you are running a spectrometer it doesn’t matter who your lab partner is in terms of what you are going to get, and if a white or an asian person is looking through a microscope they’re going to be getting the same image, but there’s more to learning and research than just the data. Problem-solving across disciplines is improved by having a more diverse team–and modern sciences are just that, team work. No more lone wolves doing groundbreaking work.
I’m not prepared to precisely arrange these priorities–i.e., this much diversity is analogous to this much millions of dollars in research funding–but to disregard diversity as a selection factor at all is, I think, DANGEROUSLY closed minded and does not reflect the reality of the world we live in, a world which has many different kinds of people in it. If you feel you or your son / daughter would be equally prepared for that world coming from a place where everyone was the same… good luck. I’ll take my chances with the more interesting more diverse group.
For similar reasons I’d want to be in or near a big-ish city or something like it (Ithaca, for example, makes up for its smaller size).
Sam notes, “Do you not value diversity beyond gender?”
Fesponse: No I don’t. I value a meritocracy.My kids had sufficient diversity of many types in high school. They don’t need it shoved down their throats forever.
Sam also notes,”–but to disregard diversity as a selection factor at all is, I think, DANGEROUSLY closed minded and does not reflect the reality of the world we live in, a world which has many different kinds of people in it”
Response: Sam, I am NOT saying that companies and governmnent shouldn’t hire all types of people or that there should be any discrimination. I just feel that hiring should be based on merit, and the same should be said of admission to colleges and graduate schools.To me, when a schools or company says they use a “Holistic Approach” to recruiting, this can easily be just an guise for outright discrimination. Frankly, I believe that a lot of discrimination does occur under this deception of “holistic approach.” What a great way for bigets to get exactly what they want or don’t want. Just claim,” we are recruiting based on a holistic approach.”
However, we can agree to disagree.
By the way, are you in college now? If so, where?
Sandy’s valuing of gender diversity exclusively smacks of hypocrisy. If indeed her interest is solely directed toward providing her children with the best facilities and opportunities, why does gender become a consideration? Sandy may claim that there are institutional barriers to the full participation of women in our society, but that applies at least equally to other groups that suffered from well-documented discriminatory treatment.
Beyond egalitarian ideals, diversity has value in the range of perspectives it fosters. In a global economy, understanding the values and perspectives of different cultures leads to novel approaches and solutions to problems. From a business perspective it is critical to the development of effective marketing strategies. Japanese automobile industry executives do not use the same marketing strategies and cars that they have in Japan to sell in the US. They rely on US based personnel and strategies. Succeeding globally requires diversity. Sandy should let go of the xenophobia, reconsider shunning the Latino kids and give careful thought to studying spanish.
Joseph, Sandy is a guy!
Secondly, I am NOT xenophobic. I am just against any form of discrimination or bias.
[...] I’ve been following with piqued interest for several days now about this whole Princeton vs. Li upcoming lawsuit ordeal. Fellow blogger, Sam Jackson, provides a great, slightly-lengthy recap of the issue at hand in his post titled, “WSJ asks: ‘Is Admissions Bar Higher for Asians At Elite Schools?’ [part 1]” which I will not rewrite again here; I do recommend reading through it to familiarize yourself with the debate and points of contention. [...]
[...] I’ve been following with piqued interest for several days now about this whole Princeton vs. Li upcoming lawsuit ordeal. Fellow blogger, Sam Jackson, provides a great, slightly-lengthy recap of the issue at hand in his post titled, “WSJ asks: ‘Is Admissions Bar Higher for Asians At Elite Schools?’ [part 1]” which I will not rewrite again here; I do recommend reading through it to familiarize yourself with the debate and points of contention. [...]
Great discussion here. I have a question that hopefully someone can answer. What exactly is meant by merit based admissions? Does this mean that only test scores are to be considered? What other criteria for college admission could/should be considered for merit based admission?
Carolyn asks, “what is merit based admission?”
Response: Ideally, merit based admission would occur when an applicant submits the same college application, essays and transcripts but has no indication as to race. They would solely note gender and social security number. Thus, there would be no picture, name, or racial information or even an interview. Thus, colleges can be as holistic as they wish with this information.
I do admit that there may be some exceptions to this. For example, if a student is an athlete trying to get in under an athletic scholarship, the coach of the applicable sport would have to see and interview the student.
Legacies would be a special case. I do understand the need for private schools to raise donations for schools. Having some legacy admits might be beneficial. Thus, there should be an option for a student to note whether they are a legacy or not, which would also result in disclosing their name.
Joseph noted that I am being hypocritical in valuing gender diversity over that of other diversity. I think not. Having a balance in gender does, in my opinion, greatly aid in the educational process since it has been shown that females learn differently than their male counterparts. In addition, students have been shown to be much happier and thus provide greater college retention if there is a gender- balanced campus. Likewise, schools that have very few makes or females tend to have unhappier students (Check out the RIT forums under http://www.studentsreview.com )
I can’t say the same for racial diversity. In fact, in mosst cases where racial diversity is highly encourage in admission ( such as in Syracuse University), the main complaint is that the races don’t mix. Kids tend to associate with others of like-kind races, which seems to defeat the purpose of racial diversity in college admission.
Hi Sandy,
Thanks for your timely response. Sandy I totally disagree with your position that it is ok to consider gender in college admissions but not race. Race, socioeconomics, religious affiliation, politics, gender, community involvement, character, etc all play an important role in providing balance to the college experience as well as enhancing it, and should be considered. To only focus on gender is being bias.
Promoting racial diversity should not be dismissed simply because some “studies” suggest that students of different races do not mix. Where as it is human nature to want to be with people you are familiar with or comfortable with, it has been my experience that people of different races will and do interact with each other when a common bond is established. This will not happen if they are not given an opportunity to interact either within the classroom or outside of it.
Ilive in a small town community that has excellent schools. My community is predominently white, and I am African American. I have two children who have gone through the school system. One has already graduated and the other is a Senior. Yes, in general even in high school, there is less mixing of the races. However the races do interact. Both my children have friends of different races, and they have developed an awareness and appreciation for people of other races, lifestyles, viewpoints, etc. I think it is unwise to only look at gender and test scores, and not consider other factors such race in promoting diversity.
A school could end up overlooking an applicant who could greatly impact the school and the community. A prime example of this Cupcake Brown. Cupcake Brown is a high profile San Francisco Attorney who recently wrote a biography titled “A Piece of Cake”. This is a must read. It is an inspiring story of how Cupcake Brown went from being a prostitute, drug addict and gang member to becoming a highly sought after attorney for one of the most prestigious law firms in the country. When she applied for law school, her test scores barely made the cut off to even be considered for any law school. Yet, Cupcake ended up graduating at the top of her class and was given the most prestigious award by her law school when she graduated. Most law schools turned Cupcake down, and only one accepted her. Had the school that accepted her only looked at her test scores, and not considered the “whole” person, she probably would have not been accepted.
One final thing, I value the fact that we are having this discussion. People of different races and backgrounds bring different viewpoints to this discussion. I doubt if this would happen if we all were of the same race and background.
Carolyn and Sam, do you think that only African Americans have faced discrimination in this country or in the world?
Again, I don’t see why skin color should be given any preference. If a kid comes from a successful, wealthy household, why should that kid be given any preference solely because of skin color. It makes no sense!
If, however, you were to argue that economic diversity is needed for colleges, I could buy into that. I certainly can see the need for a “leg up” for kids from households that are economically deprived REGARDLESS OF RACE, CREED, or RELIGION. I really don’t understand why economic circumstances aren’t much higher in the piority list among colleges other than knowing that it might require more scholarships.
Economic circumstance is actually one of the top goals of the traditionally “hyper elite” schools these days. Do you mean doing something besides spending lots of money on financial aid for low income families (e.g., ‘don’t pay at all if you make less than 50,000)? In terms of low-income recruitment etc? It’s a very hot sort of diversity that well-to-do schools are definitely looking for more and more.
Sandy,
No I do not think that African Americans are the only race that has been discriminated against and I never said so. When I say that race is one of many characteristics that should be considered, it is not just for African Americans, but other races as well, including Whites. Your race is part of who you are, and it often determines how others respond to you,good or bad. People in general are not comfortable discussing race. We often prefer to ignore the elephant in the room. Until we’re able to have frank and honest discussions about race, we will continue to pretend we live in a color blind society when in fact we do not.
It is easy to pretend that race does not or should not matter, or to simply discount it if you’ve never had to deal with race issues on a personal level on a regular basis. Being a particular race could mean being given special privileges, perks if you will. Or your race could prove to be a disadvantage but no one wants to talk about it.
I see diversity as a good thing. I’m sorry that you seem to feel that colleges that strive to increase diversity is shoving it down your throat. The wonderful thing about having so many different colleges to chose from is that students and parents who are fed up with diversity can chose a college that seeks to have a homogeneous student body. I think this is perfectly ok. You should chose a college where you best fit in. My daughter is in the process of applying to a variety of schools. Ultimately the school she choses will most definitely have a diverse student population because it is something she values and appreciates.
In Response to Carolyn who notes,”Your race is part of who you are, and it often determines how others respond to you,good or bad”
Response: Yes, and no. In my travels, I have found that most people have preconceptions. Moreover, like it or not, people tend to associate, respect and like others of similar looks and mindset UNTIL they get to know the other person.
Haven’t you ever met someone that you had formed some prior opinion of, yet, once you got to talk and know that person, you belief system changed about them, either positively or negatively? It certainly has occured to me many times.
If I like someone or if that person says something that impresses me, my whole reaction towards them changes regardless of any preconceived beliefs and certainly regardless of race, creed, or religion or gender. I truly believe that others think the same way as I.
Moreover, I never, ever said that I want my kids to attend a homogenious college. I just want a college that doesn’t discriminate based on racial profiling. In fact, I don’t want to see racial profiling in society at all, with perhaps the sole exception of airport screeners looking for mideast terrorists. LOL
As for discrimination, I am Jewish. You don’t think that we Jews haven’t face discrimination as long as African Americans or even longer in the world? Moreover, I can assure you of one thing: it hasn’t stopped for us. It just is more subtle than that of discrimination against African Americans. Yet, you will NEVER hear any Jew say, “Society or the world owes us because of all the horrible things that have occured to Jews in the past.”Jews simply want the world to remember what happened so that it doesn’t happen to anyone or any race again.
As with Asians, we try very hard in school, work, and in life to succeed. We never make excuses. At least I have never heard any from anyone that I have met or known.
Even Jews living in Germany aren’t asking for any Affirmative Action. They just want to be left alone in peace so that they can survive and thrive on their own.
As I said, I am race neutral regarding college admission. It doesn’t impact me either way. However, look at schools that tend to be more homogeneous;
Berkeley,which has the highest Asian population in the country is certainly a top notch school.
Brandeis, which has a large Jewish population is top notch.
Notre Dame, which is primarily Catholic, is considered top notch.
Howard University is considered top notch here in DC.
In fact, most of the ivys, despite their attempt at diversity, is made up mostly of rich, white folks. Even minority kids that I know at ivy schools tend to be more upper middle class. I don’t see the ivys suffering from a lack in quality.
Notice: Not one of these top schools have been hurt by a lack of diversity.
Maybe I am not being politically correct in todays world. I just believe that it is the nature of the person that should matter and not their race ever! If they have achieved success despite economic or family hardship then they should be given, in my opinion, a “leg up.” However, not because they are black, white, green or tuti-fruity, but because they are deserving.
Sandy,
It would be great if all people (others) like you were open minded enough to judge people by their deeds and actions and not outward appearance. But in the real world this is not the case. Do you think unattractive overweight people are treated differently from skinny attractive people? I suggest you research studies that have been done around this very subject. I am baffled that you would think that everyone thinks as you do. Who are you including in this “others”? Who are you leaving out?
I have some very close Jewish friends, and they certainly do not see the world as you do. So be careful about saying what Jewish people will or will not do. How can you speak for all Jewish people?
I am also wondering if you think that All African Americans want something for nothing, feels the world owes them something and are not willing to work hard to achieve their goals. And speaking of Ivys, since diversity is important to me and my family, I make it a point to check out the racial makeup of various colleges. I’ve noticed that many of the top schools such as the Ivy League and Stanford have the highest percentage of African Americans when compared to lesser quality schools.
Last but not least, I’m wondering if you think there is such a thing as “the good old boy network”. Does this not exist in both business and social institutions? Although I disagree with some of your comments, I sincerely appreciate your honest answers and the fact that you are taking the time to respond.
Carolyn, let me address each issue that you noted
First, yes, skinny people and good looking people get treated differently than ugly or fat people. Life is what it is. However,
I have found that talent and ability eventually trumps looks.
I have a sister in law that is way overweight and certainly would not be good looking even if she were thin as a rail. However, once people meet her, they can’t help liking and respecting her. She is an invited speaker each year to national software conventions and people love her. Again, actions trump looks.
Yes not all Jews think as I . What I said, however, is that every jew that I met or know thought as I did. I do know that this doesn’t represent every Jew in the world.
Yes, stereotyping is dangerous. I can only speak from the data set of my experience.
Finally, I do believe that there is such a thing as “the good ole boy network.” People tend to associate with those that have similar views, beliefs etc. However, most small business people that I have met, and I have met hundreds of thousands in my lectures, usually try to get the best people working for them. Small business does focus on profit and can’t afford to talk lessor talent due to discimination. With that said, I know that discrimination exists even among small business people, but it is, in my opinion, a lessor problem than found in bigger companies.
Finally, life is not fair. People are given varying looks, People are given varying upbringing and talents, and abilities etc. We simply have to make do with the best that we can and b e as flexible as possible in life.
[...] don’t necessarily want to spark an affirmative action debate here as happened last year on the blog with my writings on Jian Li. What I do find interesting are the questions posed by [...]