Affirmative Action Crackdown [That whole Yale thing]

As you all might have heard, Yale was all over the news today. The flaws of Affirmative Action have been discussed for a long time on this forum. Looks like we are finally seeing a govt crackdown on this.
Yale is not the only university guilty of this: Harvard, Penn, Columbia--- pretty much all of the usual suspects...

I think the DOJ outlined a reasonable remedy which Yale should be complying with. Yale, however called the accusations meritless. Many on this forum have argued that Affirmative Action is not racist; and is a necessity. These findings pretty much make the case against Affirmative Action bulletproof.

DOJ v Yale Findings:
-Yale discriminates based on race & national origin, violating federal civil rights law
-Race was a determinative factor across admission decisions
-Asian American students have 1/10th chance of admittance as African Americans with comparable academic credentials
-Caucasian students have 1/4th chance of admittance as African Americans with comparable academic credentials
-Yale rejects scores of Asian Americans and Caucasian applicants each year based purely on race, applicants that would be admitted otherwise if they were African American, Latin, or Native American.

I think this a step in the right direction. Racism works both ways. The bar should not be lower/higher for anyone based purely on their race. Meritocracy is a must.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-f…

https://www.forbes.com/sites/elanagross/2020/08/1…

 

Yale was also the center of the college admissions bribery scandal. I'd argue to say this is as much an issue with class as it is race.

Curious about how the DOJ versus Yale are analyzing the admissions data, too. Yale denies the allegations but DOJ thinks otherwise.

Additionally whites outnumber blacks significantly at Yale. Even if Yale is proven to have given preferential treatment to black americans (which I do believe) how are we to know it wasn't an international student, an athlethe, a child of a doner, or another white / asian student who actually took the spot of another white / asian student who didn't get in.

 
Most Helpful

I'm asian american and while I'm not opposed to universities giving a slight bump to underrepresented races, this kind of stuff is so blatant and really pisses me off. Yes, diversity and gender equity (looking at you, MBA programs) is important, but reducing the standards by SUCH a large amount is not the way to do it. This stuff carries into banking, consulting, PE and even tech recruiting and what ends up happening is the candidate quality really starts to widen. A large part of these issues are structural and class related, and these quick fixes do nothing but perpetuate certain stereotypes and pit groups against each other.

 

I'm a European looking in so I may be off the mark here, but I always wondered why things are done on the basis of race as opposed to socio-economic factors in the US. Like, yeah, a higher proportion of ethnic minorities are in lower socio-economic classes but that doesn't mean ALL ethnic minorities are economically disadvantaged, nor does it mean ALL Asians and Caucasians are economically advantaged.

Again, I'm probably missing context and might not be seeing the whole picture, but would it make more sense to have admissions & recruitment advantages based purely on socio-economic class or does that present similar if not worse discrimination? Would it even work? Seem's to work well where programs like that are implemented where I am in Europe.

 

You make a good point about economic classes and that is taken into consideration for admissions/scholarships as well via the essay and how well you can sell that factor

Money can purchase freedom, if you have the guts to buy it
 

Because the USA had slavery from 1619 to 1865 and legalized discrimination against blacks — “Jim Crow” — until 1965. Blacks were second class citizens.

In many places, usually in the old Confederacy, blacks weren’t allowed to vote, weren’t allowed to shop at businesses, couldn’t stay in hotels, had separate waiting rooms and water fountains and lesser schools.

That’s what affirmative action is trying to remedy. An effort to give a break to people who weren’t included when Jefferson wrote the five most explosive words in history: “all men are created equal.”

Of course, in the years since 1965, affirmative action has turned into something no one at first intended. Now black dudes who attended Exeter get into Ivy colleges using affirmative action and white working class kids who are first in their families to attend college see their chances of getting admitted go down the drain.

That’s why affirmative action is politically toxic.

Meanwhile, white legacy kids and recruited athletes get admitted at rates everyone else can only dream of.

 

You don't even know what you are talking about. Equity means that groups, regardless of effort, achieve a pre-determined equality outcome. You can't achieve achieve that without discrimination.

Never discuss with idiots, first they drag you at their level, then they beat you with experience.
 

This is a meritless case because it has been a long standing and accepted practice to use race as part of the criteria for admission. The supreme court has already ruled that admissions party based on race is acceptable. Also, recently, the Federal court ruled against the plaintiffs in the Harvard case.

The thesis of OPs argument is not correct:

"The bar should not be lower/higher for anyone based purely on their race."

It is absurd to say that Yale's admittance criteria is solely based on race. The DOJ's case does not even claim that admittance criteria is solely based on race.

 

The case you’re referring to - Fisher vs. University of Texas - held that race based affirmative action could be used if it was narrowly tailored. This means that race can be used as a component, but not the primary or largest component, in college admissions.

Yale is accused of (and is in fact) going way beyond using race as one component of an application and using it as the primary one, hence you see black applicants being admitted at 10x the rate of Asian of black applicants.

(Note that this reflects both an up-preference for black applicants and and down-preference for Asian applicants. This is a key nuance of the situation here, Yale is prioritizing one racial minority and actively de-prioritizing another one)

 

Well, yes.

Yale has a right to pick its student body. It has all sorts of needs. French horn players. Goalies for various teams. Kids who want to major in linguistics or Turkish studies as opposed to Econ or comp sci.

That’s why the whole business of ranking applicants according to grades and scores and just going down the list until the freshman class is filled is all wrong.

Yale seeks students who will benefit Yale. A student who spends four years studying just to get into dental school doesn’t need a Yale education and the admissions office knows better than to admit that kid no matter his grades and scores. Yale wants kids whose ambition is to end world hunger or something crazy like that.

 
financeabc:
This is a meritless case because it has been a long standing and accepted practice to use race as part of the criteria for admission.
In 1857, Dred Scott v. Sandford ruled that US citizenship was not meant for Black people who were once slaves or descendants of slaves. In 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson ruled that Segregation is constitutional.

Up until the mid 20th century, only "free white persons" and "persons of African nativity or persons of African descent" were allowed to become naturalized. "Yellow Peril" indeed.

Also, I remember this thing called slavery that was a very long standing and accepted practice? Not to downplay slavery, but you get the point.

[/quote]

 

I do not think what you are arguing hold a lot weight in court (may be in the supreme court because it probably has a conservative bias at the moment) because the intention of affirmative action is not to specially exclude a group from enrollment or jobs. Instead, the purpose is to include a group, which the supreme has ruled has a benefit to that group/ institutions. The supreme court has ruled that schools can use race as " a factor" for enrollment decisions. It cannot be used as the primary factor. I do not support using race as the primary factor for enrollment decisions but but I do support using race as "a factor" for decisions.

Also, I think the Harvard case is one of the least compelling cases against affirmative action, as the school does specifically try to exclude Asians from enrollment. I think Harvard is about 25% Asian. Harvard's system is not perfect but I think its criteria seems reasonable.

Federal District Court Judge Allison D. Burroughs issued her decision Tuesday, saying "the Court finds no persuasive documentary evidence of any racial animus or conscious prejudice against Asian Americans." In the decision, Burroughs said that while Harvard's admissions program is "not perfect," "ensuring diversity at Harvard relies, in part, on race conscious admissions."

This case will probably go to the supreme court.

 

If you’re still mad that URM are held to lower admission standards than white / Asians, then you’re probably not doing so hot career-wise right now. Otherwise what would you have to be upset about?

Channel that anger towards bettering yourself. Not just talking about studying technicals here, I mean being a better overall, more interesting person.

That’s why the UVA kid from your analyst class at UBS is doing so much better than you. Not because you got waitlisted at Cornell.

 

Well put. Instead of complaining, you should work your ass off to put yourself in a better position to succeed. Take the next step by networking with other smart people who have connections. There are plenty of people who do not get into target schools who work their ass off in various ways and become extraordinarily successful.

 

This is a post where I will gladly take the MS and bathe in the tears of salty white guys (am white guy myself).

I don’t come from a rich family. My dad made less than an IB Associate before he retired which is too much to be considered poor but not enough to afford me any money to fall back on if I screw up. I’m exactly the demographic that is supposed to be the most hurt by affirmative action. Poorer white people get a leg up in admissions (compared to rich white people), richer white people have more connections, but the white guys who fall in between are left in the dust (according to the MSers).

The reality is it is incredibly easy to do well in America as a middle class person from a college educated family. I got into a well known IB with shit grades from a state school - it is not hard if you have good work ethic and are likable. All you guys who went to Notre Dame instead of Princeton need to get over yourself. Notre Dame did not hold you back. You’re just not as great as you think you are

I get that it doesn’t feel fair that someone can get into a better school with worse grades than you. But that’s life... I don’t see you complaining when you get your first internship from your dads golf buddy.

 

Coming from across the pond, I find this astonishing. Our university applications are (seemingly) completely race-anonymous.

It makes much more sense to weight applications on a ‘family privilege’ basis. If you’ve got two kids: one who’s parents are Yale lawyers and went to an elite private school, and one who lived in a single mother household on welfare support, and they achieved the same exam scores, I don’t think it would be unfair to argue that the more socio-economically kid probably deserves his university place more. That should be fully independent of race.

 

I understand the sentiment from many of you guys but think about it from the perspective of the colleges. It’s much easier to define privilege by something visibly obvious like race. Socioeconomic status is harder to define and easier to make up, whereas you can’t really “hide” your race. Again, it sucks but what can we really do. This is coming from an Asian btw.

 

Just because it’s easier to do something one way doesn’t mean it should be done that way. That’s a cop out.

  • parental income
  • personal income
  • parental education level
  • ranking of school attended
  • parental career
  • parental marital status

There you go. There’s 6 factors which are immediately going to have a larger influence on your ability to perform well during exams than race is.

Know what’s funny? If your parent is a high ranking politician or fortune 100 c-suite member, your odds of making it onto an MBA program are INCREASED. Purely from social status. That’s right. You’ve likely had it easier all your life, due to a higher level of education, encouragement and opened doors that your parent can provide, but an MBA program won’t care and will count your parent’s status in your favour.

That’s just wrong.

 

I fully agree with you. Those 6 factors are much better metrics than race and they should be used. From a practical standpoint, however, it’s not reasonable to get all this information and use it for admissions. Colleges already use it to determine how much financial aid students get (FAFSA) but this is already flawed and doesn’t work. It’s so easy to lie and get around that system to get more aid (I speak from experience, I’m anonymous so I’ll admit that many of my close friends have lied on FAFSA for more aid). If they had the option to, they would probably also lie about this sort of thing to get into top schools. In theory, it sounds great. It’s just not practical though.

 

As others have said, this topic comes up all time and the anti affirmative action view is basically let's admit/hire solely based on merit. Well, diversity is valuable and certain groups have been completely out due to discrimination. As I have said many times previously, I do not agree with admitting or hiring a person who is completely unqualified. If the decision is a close one and the school and/or company wants to enhance diversity, then I would go with the minority.

 

The idea that “diversity is valuable” doesn’t wash with the line that “race doesn’t exist and thus we’re all equal” that many (not all, many) hold. If race doesn’t exist, diversity based on race is nonsense.

But of course, race exists. Thus if you’re proactively making admissions/hiring decisions in favour of race for the benefit of diversity, that in and of itself is by definition, racist, and it opens a lot of doors we don’t want to go down. What if someone wants a certain type diversity? Surely then, they’re okay to go and hire a company full of Asian-Americans.

I think what smacks people the wrong way is the mental gymnastics described above. Most people just want to go about their lives, do their best, and be treated accordingly to their performance.

 

There are two benefits to diversity

  1. Different backgrounds yield different perspectives on how to look at things and certainly one can argue that this does not have to be accomplished based partly on race
  2. Diversity helps people who have historically been shut out from certain opportunities. A white MD with white clients is probably not going to hire the black dude. That is reality.
 

Wait until you have quotas for board seats, number of MDs and F500 CEOs.

 

Asian Americans were heavily discriminated against throughout the 19th and 20th centuries and even now they are. We weren't allowed to vote until the same time as African Americans and yes my parents went to segregated schools.

And don't bullshit me and make the case that African Americans faced harsher discrimination, maybe some people did but need I remind you of the Chinese Exclusion Act, the thousands of asian killed (HOWARD ZINN A Revised look at American History). My relatives were in internment camps and they knew some asians who died due to the poor conditions. Asians were redlined on the west coast so don't bullshit me there either. We climbed our way through MERIT not through "diversity" and I'm damn proud of that.

Also it's bullshit that they just label "Asians" when you check a box because there are so many different cultures in Asia that are extremely underrepresented but don't get any help because they get thrown into a big group. Take the Philippines, Indonesia, India, per capita some of the poorest countries in the world that can ZERO help in admissions.

I've been called ching chong, fucking yellow guy more times than I can count. My parents made about $32k a year combined when I grew up. The fact that I have friends who are financially way better off who happen to be "URM" and have way easier standards (10x acceptance rate...) does not make any sense to me.

THIS IS A CLASS ISSUE NOT A RACE ONE.

 

Lots of people faced discrimination in the 19th and 20th centuries. Jews went through the holocaust and substantial discrimination in the US. I am pretty sure Jews faced quotas in schools and for a long time were restricted from being employed in many industries in the US. I am all for moving up the ladder based on merit. Jewish families, similar to Asian families, place a substantial emphasis on education, which is partly the reason a disproportionate percentage of Jews have succeeded in the US. Jews are also negatively impacted by affirmative action even though Jews still represent a disproportionate percentage of the enrollment at target schools.

With the above said, Jews generally (not all) take a different view on affirmative action in that they accept it, move on from it, and find other ways to become successful. Jews have historically had empathy for the causes of African American people. Plenty of Jews marched in the civil rights arm in arm with their fellow African American citizens

While many groups faced intense discrimination many decades ago, black people still face a lot of discrimination today.

 

As an asian person, I get and feel you on being discriminated against.

But at the same time, I don't think victimizing yourself is a good look hun. Race and socioeconomic class are so intertwined in the US because of racist policies like redlining, double-standards in drug-related sentencing and other policies that have led the US to have a mass incarceration problem. If you cannot see how class and race are fundamentally interconnected in the US, you got some reading to do. If you want schools to make judgments that account for socioeconomic class and generational wealth (or a lack thereof), Black americans are likely the greatest beneficiaries of this policy. Affirmative action as it is actually benefits white women the most.

You're buying into the model minority myth when you assume that asians have made it to where they are simply through "MERIT" -- like come on now. The brain drain and immigration of highly educated people from Asian countries to the US explains why you see a lot of really successful Asian Americans: asians who AREN'T successful or highly educated are literally barred from coming to the US. You can acknowledge that asians AND other races have simultaneously been discriminated against in the US in different, albeit still detrimental ways; it's not a zero-sum game where you're fighting for scraps with others who have been discriminated against as well. You say it's just a "class issue, not a race one" but can only point to anecdotes of wealthy URM friends, who by the way you're clearly resentful of, to support your case. It absolutely is an issue of both class and race and you can't really isolate one from the other. 

 

This is a baseless finding, DOJ had no evidence and presented no actual research or metrics that went into outcomes they found. So many things at play, and at the end of the day asians are way over represented to their population in ivies and blacks are way underrepresented. Pointing fingers at blacks solves nothing they didn’t take your spot.

 

Reprehenderit ut corrupti tempora ducimus. Assumenda explicabo rerum autem odit. Quis rerum eos facere ullam mollitia. Rerum asperiores enim cum velit iure cupiditate perspiciatis.

Labore amet unde eligendi. Quibusdam et iure quis consequatur.

Voluptas ut quasi sit enim quae aspernatur. Assumenda voluptas occaecati id vel est dicta.

Non aspernatur occaecati laborum nam dolorem dolore exercitationem. Est et culpa voluptas soluta nihil.

 

Earum vel explicabo nostrum porro molestiae sit. Placeat dicta non voluptatem fuga illum tempora ullam nostrum. Magnam aspernatur dolorem officia. Est ut nemo ut ducimus rerum dolores. Ut occaecati consequuntur eum reprehenderit. Illum voluptatem minima consequuntur dolorum.

Qui totam quo earum deleniti. Iste omnis animi recusandae placeat aut adipisci. Qui consequatur non temporibus est.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”