Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Most Fair Solution to Affirmative Action

royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 11:43:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I think the most fair solution to correct for economic factors is the one that was implemented by Florida and Texas. Individuals in the Top 10% of their graduating class in their high schools are guaranteed admission to the state school systems. I contend that this is the most fair system because it solves for factors such as economic problems while simultaneously preventing race-based discrimination.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 11:51:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:43:21 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think the most fair solution to correct for economic factors is the one that was implemented by Florida and Texas. Individuals in the Top 10% of their graduating class in their high schools are guaranteed admission to the state school systems. I contend that this is the most fair system because it solves for factors such as economic problems while simultaneously preventing race-based discrimination.

what if they don't want to go to college in their state? very few people in my school decided to go to college in state. Some went down south, some went out west, and some just went to neighboring states.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 11:54:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:51:05 AM, DanT wrote:
At 5/18/2012 11:43:21 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think the most fair solution to correct for economic factors is the one that was implemented by Florida and Texas. Individuals in the Top 10% of their graduating class in their high schools are guaranteed admission to the state school systems. I contend that this is the most fair system because it solves for factors such as economic problems while simultaneously preventing race-based discrimination.

what if they don't want to go to college in their state? very few people in my school decided to go to college in state. Some went down south, some went out west, and some just went to neighboring states.

I would say that those colleges should have a competitive, merit-based system for outside applicants that may correct for economic disparities but that does not look at race.
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two. There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot. Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:05:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:54:05 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 11:51:05 AM, DanT wrote:
At 5/18/2012 11:43:21 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think the most fair solution to correct for economic factors is the one that was implemented by Florida and Texas. Individuals in the Top 10% of their graduating class in their high schools are guaranteed admission to the state school systems. I contend that this is the most fair system because it solves for factors such as economic problems while simultaneously preventing race-based discrimination.

what if they don't want to go to college in their state? very few people in my school decided to go to college in state. Some went down south, some went out west, and some just went to neighboring states.

I would say that those colleges should have a competitive, merit-based system for outside applicants that may correct for economic disparities but that does not look at race.

Good idea.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:08:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Btw top 10% rule was implemented after SCOTUS struck down racial quota laws for colleges. The state legistlature knew that most minorities went to de facto segregated schools so they viewed the top 10% as a way to shoe them in
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:16:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.

Most people from poor districts who go to top tier universities often don't have enough knowledge to pass the classes. It isn't their fault, but the solution lies in fixing the useless schools not shoving kids into colleges they can't mange
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:20:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:16:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.

Most people from poor districts who go to top tier universities often don't have enough knowledge to pass the classes. It isn't their fault, but the solution lies in fixing the useless schools not shoving kids into colleges they can't mange

Here's the problem: the schools are never going to be fixed. In Ohio, the means through which the schools are being funded is against the state constitution, but nobody cares at all. The best thing to do is to give people the chance to succeed by helping them gain entrance into colleges. Will they have to take remedial classes? Probably, but it is better than not letting low-income individuals have a chance to attend college at all.
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:24:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:20:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:16:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.

Most people from poor districts who go to top tier universities often don't have enough knowledge to pass the classes. It isn't their fault, but the solution lies in fixing the useless schools not shoving kids into colleges they can't mange

Here's the problem: the schools are never going to be fixed. In Ohio, the means through which the schools are being funded is against the state constitution, but nobody cares at all. The best thing to do is to give people the chance to succeed by helping them gain entrance into colleges. Will they have to take remedial classes? Probably, but it is better than not letting low-income individuals have a chance to attend college at all.

They can get into college though, that's the thing. It's the top tier colleges that they get into that's the issue. Why do they need to go to rigorous schools where they HAVE TO end up in remedial classes? Those are the schools they make a beeline to here when they use that system. You realize that the top university in Texas has had its quality ruined and it's exclusiveness destroyed by this rule right? 86% of their class of 2013 is top 10%.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:26:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:24:25 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:20:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:16:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.

Most people from poor districts who go to top tier universities often don't have enough knowledge to pass the classes. It isn't their fault, but the solution lies in fixing the useless schools not shoving kids into colleges they can't mange

Here's the problem: the schools are never going to be fixed. In Ohio, the means through which the schools are being funded is against the state constitution, but nobody cares at all. The best thing to do is to give people the chance to succeed by helping them gain entrance into colleges. Will they have to take remedial classes? Probably, but it is better than not letting low-income individuals have a chance to attend college at all.

They can get into college though, that's the thing. It's the top tier colleges that they get into that's the issue. Why do they need to go to rigorous schools where they HAVE TO end up in remedial classes?
Because if they don't, the meaning of the other colleges is destroyed and employers will not recognize them since the elite all will attend the top institutions. That means we would be forcing them to attend schools and waste years without getting benefit. That itself is wrong.
Those are the schools they make a beeline to here when they use that system. :You realize that the top university in Texas has had its quality ruined and it's exclusiveness destroyed by this rule right? 86% of their class of 2013 is top 10%.

Why do schools have to be exclusive? My hope is that they do not remain exclusive.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:27:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also in high-school I was sick most of the year, but made all As, and turned all my work in on time. Because I was sick, my participation grade dropped my grade point average from around a 4.0 to about a 2.5.

My IQ is 128 on the Stanford-Binet scale, which means that I am gifted with "Very superior intelligence". I have made the Deans list ever year of college since Freshman year (2009-2011), and I'm gonna make the deans list again this year. If I was to graduate this summer I would graduate with the highest honors of Summa Cum Laude.

How well one does in Highschool is rather meaningless. My highschool didn't even have valedictorians.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:29:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Bad plan. For sooo many reasons.

Unfairness in that some schools everyone a idiot, while others it extremely hard to get that high up there.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:32:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:26:43 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:24:25 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:20:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:16:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.

Most people from poor districts who go to top tier universities often don't have enough knowledge to pass the classes. It isn't their fault, but the solution lies in fixing the useless schools not shoving kids into colleges they can't mange

Here's the problem: the schools are never going to be fixed. In Ohio, the means through which the schools are being funded is against the state constitution, but nobody cares at all. The best thing to do is to give people the chance to succeed by helping them gain entrance into colleges. Will they have to take remedial classes? Probably, but it is better than not letting low-income individuals have a chance to attend college at all.

They can get into college though, that's the thing. It's the top tier colleges that they get into that's the issue. Why do they need to go to rigorous schools where they HAVE TO end up in remedial classes?
Because if they don't, the meaning of the other colleges is destroyed and employers will not recognize them since the elite all will attend the top institutions. That means we would be forcing them to attend schools and waste years without getting benefit. That itself is wrong.

Without getting benefits? Learning the material properly as opposed to doing it through remedial classes is not beneficial? I think you over estimate how good elite colleges look on a job application. It really doesn't matter.

Besides do you think I'm a member of the "elite" because I was forced into a wealthy school?
Those are the schools they make a beeline to here when they use that system. :You realize that the top university in Texas has had its quality ruined and it's exclusiveness destroyed by this rule right? 86% of their class of 2013 is top 10%.

Why do schools have to be exclusive? My hope is that they do not remain exclusive.

If you let everyone into college you destroy it's quality.

Question: why on earth do you think class rank is a good measure of ability?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:32:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Wait, this whole time we were arguing, and that was you were doing, and you were claiming THAT was what was considered "no affirmative action".

Girl, schools have different difficult levels. It's kind of obvious that private schools are more difficult than inner city schools.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:33:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:29:57 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Bad plan. For sooo many reasons.

Unfairness in that some schools everyone a idiot, while others it extremely hard to get that high up there.

Thett and I are already discussing this.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:34:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:32:43 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Wait, this whole time we were arguing, and that was you were doing, and you were claiming THAT was what was considered "no affirmative action".

Girl, schools have different difficult levels. It's kind of obvious that private schools are more difficult than inner city schools.

It's the elimination of race-based affirmative action.

Also, my statistics were from California, which does not have this system.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:35:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:33:02 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:29:57 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Bad plan. For sooo many reasons.

Unfairness in that some schools everyone a idiot, while others it extremely hard to get that high up there.

Thett and I are already discussing this.

Whats to discuss? Its true.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 12:37:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:32:39 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:26:43 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:24:25 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:20:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:16:35 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:57 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:12:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:09:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:07:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.
Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.

For the top 10% rule to be fair, all schools must be equal in merit. That won't ever happen. Again, I'll debate this topic. The rule is soooooo fvcking idiotic

The whole point of the rule is to correct for economic disparities, dude.

But the sole practical affect is allowing people into the colleges that have no business being there and excluding intelligent people from intelligent schools.

The whole reason "they don't belong there" is because they were never given ample opportunity to succeed.

Most people from poor districts who go to top tier universities often don't have enough knowledge to pass the classes. It isn't their fault, but the solution lies in fixing the useless schools not shoving kids into colleges they can't mange

Here's the problem: the schools are never going to be fixed. In Ohio, the means through which the schools are being funded is against the state constitution, but nobody cares at all. The best thing to do is to give people the chance to succeed by helping them gain entrance into colleges. Will they have to take remedial classes? Probably, but it is better than not letting low-income individuals have a chance to attend college at all.

They can get into college though, that's the thing. It's the top tier colleges that they get into that's the issue. Why do they need to go to rigorous schools where they HAVE TO end up in remedial classes?
Because if they don't, the meaning of the other colleges is destroyed and employers will not recognize them since the elite all will attend the top institutions. That means we would be forcing them to attend schools and waste years without getting benefit. That itself is wrong.


Without getting benefits? Learning the material properly as opposed to doing it through remedial classes is not beneficial? I think you over estimate how good elite colleges look on a job application. It really doesn't matter.

For-profit schools do not get you a job. If you are not in a Top-14 law school, you will not become a lawyer (I'm serious: look this up. There is a huge scandal right now because so many lawyers are working in retail). Elite schools are very important for obtaining financial security.
Besides do you think I'm a member of the "elite" because I was forced into a wealthy school?
Those are the schools they make a beeline to here when they use that system. :You realize that the top university in Texas has had its quality ruined and it's exclusiveness destroyed by this rule right? 86% of their class of 2013 is top 10%.

Why do schools have to be exclusive? My hope is that they do not remain exclusive.

If you let everyone into college you destroy it's quality.

So we should promote nepotism and aristocracy instead? Why should the indigent even participate in our society if this is how we are going to treat them?
Question: why on earth do you think class rank is a good measure of ability?
It measures your ability relative to the abilities of the individuals who are from the same environment you are.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 1:24:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The most fair solution to Affirmative Action is the aboliotion of Affirmative Action. Resolved.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 4:29:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
First off, class rank is a terrible indicator. If classes are not weighted for difficulty, then you incentivize students to take easy, low-level classes. People should not have to make a trade-off between challenging themselves and earning a high class rank. If classes are weighted for difficulty, then they won't be weighted correctly. Not all AP classes are created equal, but they're all weighted the same. Students who take AP Calculus over the course of two years benefit over someone who accomplishes the same thing in one year and also takes an elective course. It's a messed up system.

I'll finish this post later on another computer.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 4:35:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
And continuing.

Secondly, not all schools are created equal. In some schools, you have to take as many Honors and AP courses as possible to get in the top 10%. In others, you just have to mainain all A's in level classes. I heard of one valedictorian who took level Algebra II senior year. That's a joke. You assume that this will benefit poor kids, but schools often have a mixture of rich and poor kids. You shouldn't punish poor kids for going to rich schools or reward rich kids for going to poor schools. There are also discrepancies in rich schools. There are two very good schools in my district, but I'm part of a magnet program in one school, so the smartest seventy students of each class in the district attend it. This makes one school much easier than the other.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 4:40:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I had a girl in my high school class whose mom would fix her daughter with the easiest teachers. She became valedictorian.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 5:02:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:43:21 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think the most fair solution to correct for economic factors is the one that was implemented by Florida and Texas. Individuals in the Top 10% of their graduating class in their high schools are guaranteed admission to the state school systems. I contend that this is the most fair system because it solves for factors such as economic problems while simultaneously preventing race-based discrimination.

What about those schools which do not rank? How do you determine who is in the top 10%?
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:02:03 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 12:04:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/18/2012 12:02:02 PM, thett3 wrote:
You can't be serious? The top 10% rule is ridiculously unfair. Remember what I told you? I would be in the top 5% if I went to the school closer to my house, but was redistricted to lower the income gaps between the two.
Ok, so the redistricting was what was unfair.
There's absolutely nothing fair about that. There are schools in Texas where I would likely be valedictorian, not because I'm a good student but because everyone there is an idiot.
This is because those schools are underfunded. I think economic disparities should be corrected for.

Charter schools get less funds then public schools, guess which one gets better test scores? No excuses on funding.

Class rank is the worst indicator of merit I can possibly think of.

If you want to debate me on the top 10% rule I would be glad.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 1:11:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:43:21 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think the most fair solution to correct for economic factors is the one that was implemented by Florida and Texas. Individuals in the Top 10% of their graduating class in their high schools are guaranteed admission to the state school systems. I contend that this is the most fair system because it solves for factors such as economic problems while simultaneously preventing race-based discrimination.

Different schools have different levels of difficulty. Someone who is on the top 10% at an average school would only be in the top 25% at a competitive, harder school.
Sapere Aude!