h**o
发帖数: 1879 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Parenting 讨论区 】
发信人: hguo (Who+am+I?), 信区: Parenting
标 题: 80/20 撒谎欺骗这件事，向 Beida101 请教
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 15 22:16:28 2012, 美东)
Beida101, 您在讨论 80/20 发布的文本的下面这一段时认为他们是撒谎欺骗，
＂哈佛大学年初时被教育部调查是否在录取上对亚裔有歧视之嫌，今年亚裔的录取率就
是近年来最高的，比往年增加了15%。＂
想跟您请教一下。
首先，撒谎欺骗，对任何个人或团体都是一个非常严重的指控。是不是可以提供一下你
参考的资料，让别人印证一下？
其次，假定你讲的资料是事实，80/20 是资料有误，还是故意撒谎欺骗，这个都是有待
查证的。做这样的指控，是不是可以提供一下你的证据，让别人了解一下，80/20 确实
是在已经知道你所讲的这个“事实”的情况下，还故意撒谎欺骗？ | z****0
发帖数: 3942 | 2 80-20根本没有中文版的＂号召书＂，所有他们的文宣只有英文版。你可以去他们网站
看看我说的是否准确。
http://www.80-20initiative.net/
Beida101所引用的话只是一个这里的帖子里楼主的话，根本不是80-20的说法，结果被
他挑出来找刺。他自己明白着呢，就是不肯承认。
【在 h**o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Parenting 讨论区 】
: 发信人: hguo (Who+am+I?), 信区: Parenting
: 标 题: 80/20 撒谎欺骗这件事，向 Beida101 请教
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 15 22:16:28 2012, 美东)
: Beida101, 您在讨论 80/20 发布的文本的下面这一段时认为他们是撒谎欺骗，
: ＂哈佛大学年初时被教育部调查是否在录取上对亚裔有歧视之嫌，今年亚裔的录取率就
: 是近年来最高的，比往年增加了15%。＂
: 想跟您请教一下。
: 首先，撒谎欺骗，对任何个人或团体都是一个非常严重的指控。是不是可以提供一下你
: 参考的资料，让别人印证一下？
| z****0
发帖数: 3942 | 3 这是80-20关于亚裔大学录取受歧视的文章。
原文链接在这里：http://www.80-20initiative.net/wordpress/?p=713
A 450 Point SAT Gap: Large Racial Preferences Hurt All College Applicants,
Including the Intended Beneficiaries
Posted on March 13, 2012 by 8020 initiative
Dear Fellow Asian Americans:
41,483 people have shown the courage of their conviction by taking the 80-20
EF Survey. We need 9,000 more votes to show the INTENSITY of your concerns.
A 50,000 total would impress the Supreme Court, as few issues in the US can
mobilize an equivalent 1 million people when projected to the general
population (of which Asian Americans are 5%) http://admin.80-20nj.info/cgi/80/e?l=8/11e/f&w=no
Send it across the finish line. YOU can do it by ensuring your spouse,
youths, parents, friends, and colleagues all VOTE. (Permanent residents and
citizens only)
Take the Survey NOW! Do Your Part to Improve our Destiny.
Is the racial preferences in college admission merely a “tie breaker”, a
“nudge factor”, and “one in many” consideration?
The “National Study of College Experience” (NSCE) project conducted over
9000 student interviews. Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade performed
rigorous regression analysis on the vast NSCE database and released the
empirical findings in his 2009 book [1], which was widely cited by the news
media: To receive equal consideration by elite colleges, Asian Americans
must outperform Whites by 140 points, Hispanics by 280 points, Blacks by 450
points in SAT (Total 1600). The result is not a simplistic test score
comparison: The differences have been controlled for other variables such as
sex, citizenship, athlete and legacy
status, # of AP tests and SAT II test, GPA, class rank, National merit
scholar status, and high school type.
We believe college admission policy should reflect the common American ideal
of Equal Opportunity, afforded to every individual through the “Equal
Protection Clause” in the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. The
admission policy should not discriminate against any group of people for
innate collective characteristics, such as race and ethnicity, which an
individual can NOT change. Instead, it should be firmly based on individual
merit, which is to be broadly defined to include academic qualifications
necessary for successful college learning, and personal character strengths
such as perseverance, hardworking ethic, leadership skills, and individual
initiative to overcome adverse conditions, such as those imposed by
socioeconomic status.
Race, ethnicity and national origin ar daf e PROTECTED categories in the US
constitution, for good reasons. In a job interview, if you ask a candidate’
s race, you could be sued and your company could be investigated for racial
discrimination under the “Equal Protection Clause”. Why is college
admission so different? Not only the race question MUST be asked, you MUST
answer (or your last name would be Googled to determine your race), and your
answer MUST be used as the basis for differential treatment. Is this not
institutionalized reverse discrimination?
Furthermore, large racial preferences also hurt the intended beneficiaries.
It imposes an “academic mismatch” among the admitted students, reducing
the efficiency and quality of classroom instruction to all students, and
leading to academically weaker students to self-segregate into less
challenging classes, thereby reducing classroom diversity [2]. The US Civil
Right Commission issued a 2010 report about the disconcerting role of racial
preferences played in undermining minority graduation in science and
engineering programs [3]. In professions where universal qualification exams
are required, such as legal service, higher numbers of “racially preferred
” students entering the law schools did not lead to an increased numbers of
“racially preferred” lawyers because of the high attrition rate [4].
Large racial preferences were also found to hurt the minority pipeline to
academia [5].
It is time to do what every other developed nation does, which is NOT to
even ask the race question in college application.
Please join 80-20 TODAY. Go to http://www.8020initiative.net/membership/join.asp
Or send your check to: 80-20 PAC 13337 South St. #189 Cerritos, CA
90703. Family membership is $50 (two), individual $35, student $15.
Respectfully,
The 80-20 Collective Leadership
References
[1] "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal: Race and Class in Elite College
Admission and Campus Life" by Thomas Espenshade (Princeton University Press,
2009)
[2] “The Role of Ethnicity in Choosing and Leaving Science in Highly
Selective Institutions”, R. Elliott et. al. 37 Research in Higher Education
681 (1996)
[3] “Encouraging Minority Students to Pursue Science, Technology,
Engineering and Math Careers”, US Commission on Civil Rights, Briefing
Report, Oct 2010.
[4] “Are Black/White Disparities in Graduation and Passing the Bar Getting
Worse, or Better?” by R. Sander. http://www.elsblog.org/the_empirical_legal_studi/2006/09/ sander_2_black_.html
[5] “The Occupational Choices of High-Achieving Minority Students” (
Harvard University Press 2003) | s*******s
发帖数: 9926 | |
|
