Affirmative Action: Who Should qualify for university scholarships?

[kia027]

without regard to..........NATIONAL ORIGIN
[/FONT][/I][/COLOR]That should answer your queries as to why, immigrants should be eligible for Affirmative Action.....as well as why it was not exclusively meant for native born African Americans.


[/B][/B]

You beat me to the answer franksterr.

[Tropicana]

without regard to..........NATIONAL ORIGIN
[/FONT][/I][/COLOR]That should answer your queries as to why, immigrants should be eligible for Affirmative Action.....as well as why it was not exclusively meant for native born African Americans.

Do you comprehend or even read what you are posting
[/B][/B]

DUH!!! Would I have bolded NATIONAL ORIGIN and put it in blue if I DIDN'T read it.....

Clearly YOU did not read the rest of what I bolded and put in HUGE letters......let me try red this time:

Affirmative action policies initially focused on improving opportunities for African Americans in employment and education.

As usual, people on this board are burying their heads in the sand and treating what is being discussed in the media and prominent thinkers in the African community as a non-issue. What is wrong wid onoo anyway? What are you afraid of?


Guess you missed this part too:

Harvard professors Lani Guinier and Henry Louis Gates Jr.brought up the issue in 2004, noting at the time that two thirds of Harvard black students were immigrants, children of immigrants, or children of interracial couples.

[franksterr]

DUH!!! Would I have bolded NATIONAL ORIGIN and put it in blue if I DIDN'T read it.....

Clearly YOU did not read the rest of what I bolded and put in HUGE letters......let me try red this time:

You obviously did not understand what it meant or you would not have continued to support your untenable proposition.

In your google search you uncovered the facts that negated your argument and in show of obstinacy continue to try and make a point that when you have none

As usual, people on this board are burying their heads in the sand and treating what is being discussed in the media and prominent thinkers in the African community as a non-issue. What is wrong wid onoo anyway? What are you afraid of?


Guess you missed this part too:

You are the only one i see burying their head in sand......it is clear by your own links that the Affirmative Action was meant for us....WITHOUT REGARD TO NATIONAL ORIGIN - Yet you persist in this line of reasoning that is text book Ostrich behavior.

[Tropicana]

You obviously did not understand what it meant or you would not have continued to support your untenable proposition.

What position? I have stated no opinion about this topic. I have asked questions and shared different points of view to stimulate discussion.

In your google search you uncovered the facts that negated your argument and in show of obstinacy continue to try and make a point that when you have none

One more time I have not put forth any arguments so how can I negate any argument......I have pointed out that this is an issue that is being discussed in the media and by thought leaders in the Black community and asked people to weigh in.

If you don't want to weigh in then come out of this thread and move on to a topic that is of interest to you.

You are the only one i see burying their head in sand......it is clear by your own links that the Affirmative Action was meant for us....WITHOUT REGARD TO NATIONAL ORIGIN - Yet you persist in this line of reasoning that is text book Ostrich behavior.

National origin was stated as one of the areas of focus yet the main focus has been on programmes to help women and African Americans.....I believe the word "priority" was used.


There is a feeling in some sectors of the Black community that African Americans have not benefited enough from these programmes.

[Tropicana]

Here is another one:

The election of Barack Obama -- African American because of his African father, distinguishing him from how the phrase is commonly used -- has brought unprecedented attention to the diversity of backgrounds of those covered by the term. Within higher education, one of the more sensitive issues in discussion of admissions and affirmative action in recent years has been the relative success of immigrant black Americans compared to black people who have been in the United States for generations.A new study has found that among high school graduates, “immigrant blacks” -- defined as those who immigrated to the United States or their children -- are significantly more likely than other black Americans to attend selective colleges. In fact, immigrant black Americans are more likely than white students to attend such colleges.
The research -- published in the journal Sociology of Education (abstract available here) -- is the second major study in two years to try to define the “advantage” of some black applicants to top college. In 2007, a team of researchers published a study in The American Journal of Education finding that while only about 13 percent of black people aged 18 or 19 in the United States are first- or second-generation immigrants, they made up 27 percent of black students at the selective colleges studied.
The new study focuses on the entire population of high school graduates to see where they go to college, comparing immigrant black people, “native-born blacks” (the authors’ terms for others), and white students. The authors are two assistant professors of sociology -- Pamela R. Bennett of Johns Hopkins University and Amy Lutz of Syracuse University.
They begin their study by noting that previous research has documented that a smaller proportion of black high school graduates than white high school graduates enroll in college. But when students of similar socioeconomic status are compared, the black high school graduates are more likely than their white counterparts to enroll. Given the debate about the immigrant factor in analyzing black enrollments, the authors set out to determine “whether this net black advantage is very African American.”
Using data from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, Bennett and Lutz found that among high school graduates, 75.1 percent of immigrant blacks enrolled in college, a slightly higher percentage than that of whites (72.5 percent) and substantially larger than for native blacks (60.2 percent).
In terms of the college destinations of those who enrolled in college, the rates for immigrant blacks compared to other black students were similar for two-year colleges and non-selective four-year colleges that are not historically black. The biggest gap was at selective colleges, which enroll only 2.4 percent of native black high school graduates but 9.2 percent of immigrant blacks (and 7.3 percent of whites). Native black students are more likely than immigrants to enroll at historically black colleges. But the authors noted that historically black colleges are clearly appealing to some percentage of the black immigrant population, even though those students wouldn’t have the same multi-generation ties to the colleges that are found among many African Americans.


The authors of the new study note that there are key differences in the demographics of the black Americans whose families are new to the United States and those who aren’t. Immigrant black students are more likely than other black students to grow up In two-parent families and to attend private schools -- both characteristics that, across all sorts of groups, tend to indicate a greater likelihood of attending a selective college.
While their study found success for non-immigrant black students in enrolling in some kinds of colleges, the authors note that the sector -- selective colleges -- in which this is less likely is also the sector most likely to lead to many kinds of high wage careers. More examination of the issue is needed, the authors write, to combat “continued socioeconomic inequality.”
That scholarly phrasing may not do justice to the tensions raised by such issues. In 2003, at a reunion of black alumni of Harvard University, Lani Guinier, a law professor, was quoted by The Boston Globe as raising the question of whether black students who are “voluntary immigrants” should be the beneficiaries of affirmative action.


Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2...#ixzz34O3tTapI
Inside Higher Ed

[franksterr]

What position? I have stated no opinion about this topic. I have asked questions and shared different points of view to stimulate discussion.

Did you not make this statement in your opening thread as the justification of your queries...

These were designed to help African American young people. Should our children qualify?

You now realize they were not design for only Native born African American and so you are now back pedaling.

One more time I have not put forth any arguments so how can I negate any argument......

Of course you have.....you are here in this thread (and in Black American vs Immigrant Americans) used many links to support the idea that immigrants blacks are somehow getting too much of something that is and was not meant for them.
Now you are slowly realizing how wrong those ideas are.

I have pointed out that this is an issue that is being discussed in the media and by thought leaders in the Black community and asked people to weigh in.

Yes these are ideas being discuss by prominent blacks who have an agenda to
1. Blow out of proportion a minor situation
2. Create a class difference in the Black Community
3. Popularizing and Mainstreaming ideas about Blacks propagated by White
4. Significantly reducing employment and educational opportunities for a specific class of Blacks etc

If you don't want to weigh in then come out of this thread and move on to a topic that is of interest to you.

I am weighing in maybe it is you can't stand the truth and would rather I not weigh in.

National origin was stated as one of the areas of focus yet the main focus has been on programmes to help women and African Americans.....I believe the word "priority" was used.

In the original order sign by President Kennedy, women (sex) was not in it nor do I believe the word priority was used it stated

WHEREAS discrimination because of race, creed, color, or national origin is contrary to the Constitutional principles and policies of the United States.

Women or sex was added later.
Please show where in the word priority was used and in what context?

There is a feeling in some sectors of the Black community that African Americans have not benefited enough from these programmes.

Yes there is such a feeling real or imagine - the way to solve it is not by dividing the Black community but rather to look at whats happening in the Local high schools where students are being prepared for college.
1. School to prison pipeline - policy
2. Marginalization- under funding
3. Outdated textbooks - structural neglect
4. Curriculum that alienated - cultural personal and ego abuse
5. Teacher's expectations or attitudes etc.

Of course family and the home has a role to play but that,s for another time

[Tropicana]

One more time.....and this is the last time I am addressing this.

I raised an issue that has been discussed in the media and by thought leaders in the Black community on and off since at least 1999.

I expressed NO opinion one way or another on the topic.

Of course you have.....you are here in this thread (and in Black American vs Immigrant Americans) used many links to support the idea that immigrants blacks are somehow getting too much of something that is and was not meant for them.

you need to learn to read you know....in the African American vs Immigrants thread...which was started by blu not me by the way...I raised the issue of some Africans, Jamaicans and other Carribbean immigrants being snooty towards African Americans. I pointed out that this is causing resentment. Then you and a couple of others came along and said that this was not an issue so I rammed articles, videos, and discussions from other board down your throat to prove that it IS an issue and that everything is not peachy-keen and wonderful like you and others were trying to pretend.

In this thread, I presented an issue, specifically stated that I was not going to weigh in yet and presented articles with different points of view.


Once again you and Miss Ting jumped down my throat so I presented NUFF articles to prove that this is an issue and it has been discussed in the media and by thought leaders in the Black community NUFF times. If it were clear cut, there would have been no discussion and no story for the media to cover.

You asked on what basis I was raising the issue and making the statement about the intended audience for affirmative action....and I shared not one but NUFF articles that I had seen where this issue was discussed.

So flippin sue me.

I will continue to raise and present issues for discussion. Sometimes I will express my opinion....and I am the last person on here who is shy about expressing my opinion boldly.....sometimes I will just present the topic for discussion and let others speak first. I do this so we can focus on the ISSUE not the person raising it.

If you don't like it you can bite it. No one is compelling you to read my threads. Why not start some of your own threads....or are you completely lacking in imagination.

I think from now on I will state my personal opinions in bold pink to help people like you who can't distinguish between my opinion and my outlining an issue that is being discussed in the media and the Black or Jamaican communities.


So if you want to jump down my t'roat at every turn, and clearly you do, I suggest you pick a thread in which I have actually stated an opinion......like this one. Go pee your pants over that one.

http://www.jamaicans.com/forums/showthread.php?123693-Mark-Cuban-s-Comment-About-Hoodies

As for this topic...if you want to jump down my t'roat it may be best to wait until I have actually expressed an opinion don't you think. Then your comments will look less personally biased.

[franksterr]

One more time.....and this is the last time I am addressing this.

I raised an issue that has been discussed in the media and by thought leaders in the Black community on and off since at least 1999.

I expressed NO opinion one way or another on the topic.

Tenderfoot you seem to not know the difference between and argument and an opinion.
Where and when did I address your opinions.
One can make arguments and or propositions that may or may not be your opinions.
When you post links supporting one side or the other of an issue then that becomes your Arguments.......Capiche

you need to learn to read you know....in the African American vs Immigrants thread...which was started by blu not me by the way...I raised the issue of some Africans, Jamaicans and other Carribbean immigrants being snooty towards African Americans. I pointed out that this is causing resentment. Then you and a couple of others came along and said that this was not an issue so I rammed articles, videos, and discussions from other board down your throat to prove that it IS an issue and that everything is not peachy-keen and wonderful like you and others were trying to pretend.

I never said there was no issue and besides you used some of the same or related arguments

In this thread, I presented an issue, specifically stated that I was not going to weigh in yet and presented articles with different points of view.


Once again you and Miss Ting jumped down my throat so I presented NUFF articles to prove that this is an issue and it has been discussed in the media and by thought leaders in the Black community NUFF times. If it were clear cut, there would have been no discussion and no story for the media to cover.

Yes you have presented an issue to which you have only presented arguments for one side.

You asked on what basis I was raising the issue and making the statement about the intended audience for affirmative action....and I shared not one but NUFF articles that I had seen where this issue was discussed.

So flippin sue me.

Again I never denied that there was an issue

I will continue to raise and present issues for discussion. Sometimes I will express my opinion....and I am the last person on here who is shy about expressing my opinion boldly.....sometimes I will just present the topic for discussion and let others speak first. I do this so we can focus on the ISSUE not the person raising it.

If you don't like it you can bite it. No one is compelling you to read my threads. Why not start some of your own threads....or are you completely lacking in imagination.

Please continue raising issues for discussion I enjoy them
I have bitten and is have much fun

I think from now on I will state my personal opinions in bold pink to help people like you who can't distinguish between my opinion and my outlining an issue that is being discussed in the media and the Black or Jamaican communities.


So if you want to jump down my t'roat at every turn, and clearly you do, I suggest you pick a thread in which I have actually stated an opinion......like this one. Go pee your pants over that one.

http://www.jamaicans.com/forums/showthread.php?123693-Mark-Cuban-s-Comment-About-Hoodies

As for this topic...if you want to jump down my t'roat it may be best to wait until I have actually expressed an opinion don't you think. Then your comments will look less personally biased.

I never addressed you opinions in this thread just your arguments and or propositions

[Tropicana]

My opening post was neutral and outlined the issues.

DUH!! The first article I posted was neutral...simply outlining the issues. It included this that was pro:

“Things such as affirmative action were designed to redress the history of African-American inequality. But that emphasis on African-American shifted certainly by the late 60s and early 1970s whereby affirmative action in many respects represented diversity and the label diversity was used to incorporate black immigrants from the Caribbean and Africa,” explained Hunter College, professor of Africana studies Anthony Brown.

DUH! I am the one who presented and BOLDED IN BLUE IN LARGE LETTERS the information re: national origin.

Onno did jump dung mi t'roat about this being a non-issue so I had to present where this issue has been raised in the past.




Since you are willing to conclude that this is an issue. Here is more detail about the pro argument as well as some of the challenges.

[franksterr]

Well truth be told I have not yet rightfully address your proposition which are the links you posted, which you have grossly misconstrued and failed to fully comprehend all you seemed to have caught was the salacious sound bites.

A more in depth analysis would reveal much that you have overlook in your rush to make a point, which I am wont to do when time permits.
In the mean time it is much more fun schooling you

[j-kid]

Let mi put it dis way. Fus disqualify all dem odda descendants ah immigrants yuh did not mention, who now qualify, den wi can talk.

[Tropicana]

The West Indian case study provides a poignant reminder to scholars of the ways in which the ‘diversity’ rationalexli
may undercut the remedial aims
undergirding affirmative action.xlii
Notably, the University of Michigan Law
School’s affirmative action policy also made “special reference to the
inclusion of students from groups which have been historically discriminated
against, like African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans, who
without this commitment might not be represented . . . in meaningful
numbers.”xliii
Any discussion of comparative suffering of different minority
groups is necessarily challenging. West Indians share a history of
enslavement (in the West Indies as opposed to in the United States). They
also share a history of significant discrimination in the century between their
initial admission to the United States and the civil rights movement.
Nevertheless, it appears indisputable that as voluntary (as opposed to
involuntary) migrants, West Indians cannot credibly claim to share the
peculiar history of discrimination in the United States, cited in Grutter that
was visited upon African Americans.xliv
One contribution notes that “[w]e
know of no one who contends that affirmative action in the United States is
being used to target the history of discrimination suffered by oppressed
groups in other parts of the world . . . [t]hus, the history of discrimination
that matters for the purposes of American affirmative action plans, logically,
must be a group’s experience in the United States.”xlv


To be more precise, it is not that West Indians have not suffered discrimination. It is that such
discrimination is of an entirely different character than that visited on African-Americans.

Proponents of the “only American discrimination matters view” would
contend that the “diversity” rationale appears to be a more appropriate basis
to justify affirmative action policies which benefit West Indians. Even some
of affirmative action’s strongest traditional defenders, however, argue that
they cannot justify affirmative action based on diversity alone.

Arguably, these more “honest” rationales would exclude West Indians.xlix
Thus, it is little wonder that West Indians have become a touchstone for a
divisive debate even among affirmative action’s ardent defenders. Bluntly
put, admissions officers have essentially been accused of pursuing
affirmative action “on the cheap.”
l
Critics contend that admissions officers are favoring relatively recent arrivals rather than those who have suffered historical injustices within the U.S. The debate has elicited a range of
responses. Ross Douhat writing in the New York Times has asserted that
disproportionate West Indian representation indicates a fatal flaw in how
affirmative action programs work.


Others contend that administrators need not exclude West Indians, but simply need to make better attempts to expand the pool of prospective candidates by pinpointing applicants who are native African Americans.


Yet others contend that their colleagues should “let sleeping dogs lie.”


Notwithstanding “honest” rationales for a fairer affirmative action regime, as
a practical matter, the exclusion of West-Indian-Americans from affirmative
programs would pose an immediate problem for administrators seeking to
bolster their numbers of black students.

For example, one senior official at the Educational Testing service estimates that native African-Americans constitute only half of the black students at elite colleges.

It bears although West Indians generally achieve better results than
African Americans on standardized tests, their results are not sufficiently
strong to be admitted at similarly high levels without the benefit of
affirmative action.



Thus, close to half of the current black cohort at elite institutions would arguably be at risk if West-Indian Americans were excluded from affirmative action programs.

The question remains: why are West-Indians considered more akin to theFirst Family than a native African-American family? But there is somethingfar deeper at work here than conventional contributory factors likeprofessional or well-educated parents. Out of an abundance of caution, Iwant to be very clear here. My point is not to set a tone which disqualifiesparental educational attainment and SES as important contributors to"success." I do not mean to undermine these factors (which are clearlyimportant), but rather to highlight the potential primacy of others factors,such as network and institutional savvy. Moreover, given the increasingsignificance of SES in affirmative action screening, presumably theseaffluent West Indian migrant children to which Guinier refers would befiltered out by criteria which emphasize SES. This brings us to the nub of the narrative: What of West Indian migrants,who are cash-poor, but who test better than more affluent African-Americans? The academic success of even cash-poor West Indian migrantsin the United States poses an interesting dilemma for affirmative actionprograms predicated on SES. It is a pressing issue: many of the highperforming recent arrivals, in particular, are often cash poor.

http://www3.nd.edu/~ndlaw/law-and-econ-program/brown-WestIndian.pdf

[Tropicana]

One challenge is that people are assuming that the Black students including the children of immigrants are getting admitted because of affirmative action.

Aries is not closed off to the challenges that such programs face. Minorities at Amherst often faced the challenge of being viewed as racial representatives, even when the racial categories played little role in their own self-concepts. “I am not an African American,” one daughter of Jamaican immigrants stated. Affluent black students found that well-intentioned faculty members assumed that they were poor, and more obnoxiously, the fact of racial preference in admissions led some white students to question the intelligence of minority students. Black students also reported judging by this same poisonous standard. As Christopher, an affluent black student recounted, he sometimes held his black friends in contempt when they failed to meet his academic expectations: “How did you get in here? It must have been because you’re black.”

http://www.newrepublic.com/book/review/ivy-league-elite-colleges-race-affirmative-action-elizabeth-aries

[Tropicana]

Well truth be told I have not yet rightfully address your proposition which are the links you posted, which you have grossly misconstrued and failed to fully comprehend all you seemed to have caught was the salacious sound bites.

A more in depth analysis would reveal much that you have overlook in your rush to make a point, which I am wont to do when time permits.
In the mean time it is much more fun schooling you

I am well versed on these issues...much more well versed than you so I will do the schooling.

The issues have been outlined....now let's discuss the ISSUES!!! Sick of the likes of you making every strikin issue a personal attack. What is your point of view about the issues.

If all you intend to do is sling mud and not focus on the issues I suggest that you come out of my thread.

[Tropicana]

Let mi put it dis way. Fus disqualify all dem odda descendants ah immigrants yuh did not mention, who now qualify, den wi can talk.

I did not mention? How me come into dis.


We are discussing African Americans vs Black immigrants and the children of Black immigrants. I am sharing a range of relevant articles.

The issue is Affirmative Action which has 2 parts:

- admission (even if academic performance is below the standard bar)
- financial assistance to give certain groups a leg up (this can be for students who qualify for admission under the regular criteria but lack the financial resources to pay for an Ivy League education).

Should Black immigrants and the children of Black immigrants qualify for one part, both parts, no parts? Why or why not? What should be done about the issue of not enough African Americans benefiting from these programmes?