Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why should kids who bust their behinds studying have to have the standards lower, all that it would create is a general lowering of standards which will dumb down EVERYONE.
What I mean is, for example, if a student who usually get 50's on a test studies hard they may get a 65 (passing) but if that goal is lowered to say 55 then the student will see that they don't have to study quite as hard.
For me as a high achieving student, it annoys me when the goal of the class is lower. All I can think of is "wow, I killed myself doing this, but if the 75 that so and so got is the same/ get praised the same what's the point..."
bottom line, if it happens to be Asian students who put in the effort, let the Asian students get in. If all of the resources are available but aren't being utilized it is no one but the student's fault.
Yikes! This is an extremely controversial topic. In Georgia, we see the achievement gap very prominently. I'm too familiar with this debate.
California has banned the use of race bias in admissions and the result was the creation of the UCs. Asian enrollment skyrocketed.
However, in Michigan this same ruling was shot down. This is an on going debate in higher ed.
Personally, I believe there is no blanket answer. Each and every "magnet school" should be carefully analysed and thought through before "lowering the standards" or "promoting equality" whichever side of the debate you're on.
I agree with Columbia University President, Lee Bollinger who is a big proponent of Affirmative Action. I don't, however, agree with lowering the standards for minorities. For example, an Asian American male in the US has to have higher MCAT and GPA scores than a Black male to be accepted into medical school(https://www.aamc.org/data/) This disenfranchise the entire group of people.
So in English, yeah, we should put more money into improving predominantly black and hispanic high schools than we do "improving" schools that are already excelling. I do not think it's fair to use race in college admissions.
There are so many socioeconomic variables that need to be taken into account for the OP's question to be answered. Are the students located in the same school district? What are the GPAs of the students? Any crime records? Any history of violence? Are they motivated and driven students who will succeed at the elite high school as opposed to their old high school? What is the socioeconomic standing of the minority students compared to the elite high school(higher income is usually associated with doing better academically)?
My opinion would be to spend more money towards the non-elite high schools and let the elite students continue to do their thing.
I was reading an interesting article about how a majority of the students getting into the elite PUBLIC High Schools in New York City (as well as elsewhere) are now mostly Asian. The main way the students can get into these schools- with their extremely challenging academics- is by scoring very highly in a standardized tests.
The Asian students who want to get into these elite High Schools will study 12-14 hours a day and take all kinds of prep classes to help them score high on the tests. FREE prep classes are available for Black and Hispanic students but they rarely enroll. Their advocates say they should be allowed to get into these elite PUBLIC High Schools based on their grades or teacher recommendations even if they score poorly on the entrance tests. Critics say that a good GPA or strong recommendations by teachers from a poor middle school does not really show they are strong enough students to survive the elite High School's academics. The percentage of students who are White is dropping also as many white students can't compete with the Asians who study 14 hours a day.
Critics say that if you let Non Asian students who score below the mean on the entrance tests they will have to lower academic standards and the elite students will suffer. But other critics say it is not fair to only let kids in who score well on the test. What do you think?
Maybe they could have 2nd tier elite schools and make them boundary specific. So for example a Bronx student takes the test in 8th grade but scores too low for the Elite Schools around the city. Yet compared to other Bronx kids he does well and could go to the Bronx specific elite school. There he'd be surrounded by smart kids, who look like him and will get the extra push to get him to the next level.
Basing admission off of one test is probably not the best way to evaluate candidates, but it's tough to come up with a fair way to improve diversity without addressing the underlying cultural discrepancies. For families that value education, changing the admission criteria will probably just result in those families adjusting their activities to better suit the new criteria. If you weight extracurriculars more heavily, I'll bet those families will start signing their kids up for volunteer work and music lessons.
I have been reading this thread for a while now, trying to figure out how to state what I think on this matter. I think as above, to base admission on one test is not the best way. Someone could be a bad test taker, or they could be sick the day of the test, or a million other things.
I think GPA should be looked at, along with the quality of the courses selected. By middle school, students have some choices, and many choose courses to "game" the system.
I think if entry becomes a matter of gaming the entire admissions system, it should be thrown out and replaced with something else.
I have been reading this thread for a while now, trying to figure out how to state what I think on this matter. I think as above, to base admission on one test is not the best way. Someone could be a bad test taker, or they could be sick the day of the test, or a million other things.
I think GPA should be looked at, along with the quality of the courses selected. By middle school, students have some choices, and many choose courses to "game" the system.
I think if entry becomes a matter of gaming the entire admissions system, it should be thrown out and replaced with something else.
While I agree that a single test is probably not a good way to choose the students, the problem with GPAs is that the schools the kids attend are not equivalent and the teachers are also not equivalent, so GPA may not show much about the student.
Instead of dumbing everything down so non-Asian American kids can feel good, I think the American education system might be better off if people were protesting for Asian Americans to start running the whole damned system.
They just might be the public school's best, last hope against self-destruction.
Instead of dumbing everything down so non-Asian American kids can feel good, I think the American education system might be better off if people were protesting for Asian Americans to start running the whole damned system.
They just might be the public school's best, last hope against self-destruction.
But would they work for what the jobs pay now? And under the current conditions?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
