She made it, so she was better off going to UPenn and Wharton. She was a kid who had the academic skills to make it at an Ivy League school, so for her it payed off. We don’t know if any bars were lowered for her, but it sounds like she had fantastic grades and study skills. As for your other question, I don’t know the data, but Jason Riley does make some good points regarding one down side. I’m not sure he’s arguing that we shouldn’t have ever tried AA. I haven’t read his book. That stat about increased graduation rates was pretty stunning, right?
You guys probably know this, but there have been some lawsuits from Asian groups regarding admissions to some of the top schools and raising the bar for Asian kids. The Ivies, and even the top public universities like UCLA or Cal do not want to have a majority of Asian students, because they are striving for their schools to reflect the population.
At one time there was a big push at Harvard to accept more poor kids from the small town America, the middle, because is was a bastion for upper class WASP kids, and Jewish kids from the East coast. We see that in CA where admissions consider “hardship”, or try to admit kids from poorer high schools. That’s not race specifically, but it does result in a more diverse population, and despite dropping race-based admissions, we continue to have really diverse student bodies because of these efforts.
In CA we have a tree-tier public school system. Community College, State Colleges, and the UC System at the top. Of course, some of those kids who are the top students at their poor high school, might get into a UC, but if they are going to quit, or wash out into a major like sociology, because they don’t have the math skills to succeed in Engineering, then they might be better off starting at a CC or State School where they can succeed. The UCs accept transfer students from the CC system at a really high rate. It’s often a better way to go if the kid doesn’t have the skills.
Agree, to a point. AND this is one reason I REALLY like school choice. Some of these very bright minority kids are attending under-performing schools. They may be one of the top 10 students in their graduating class, but they might only be an average student at a top high school like the one my kids attend, where 96% of the students go on to higher education. Yes, they can rise, but it’s harder for them to compete.
Motivated parents who value education have always looked for better schools. When you’re a middle-class or upper-class family, it’s a huge consideration in where you decide to live. The Puff family can choose to buy a home on this side of the freeway, where there’s a nationally ranked public high school. Poor families don’t always have that option. Charter schools, public school lotteries, and vouchers help with that. It’s understandable that public school teachers don’t like to see the top kids disappear from the neighborhood school, but they’ve been seeing that FOREVER as families with money can move, or pay for private tuition. These options just give poor families who are motivated a similar choice.
Charter schools generally do not crop up in areas where there are great public schools. The majority of kids in my area attend the public schools, because they are really good. There aren’t any public charters around, because there’s no demand. They are REALLY popular in poor urban areas, and with Black and Hispanic families.
Well, I don’t think this is going out on a limb to say there are cultural differences. Funny story. My son plays violin. He started lessons when he was nine. His elementary school is 48% Asian. There are tons of little Asian kids who are taking violin lessons at age three. To give you an idea, our high school has three orchestras. Anyway, I took him to a try out for the Honor’s orchestra when he was in sixth grade, and as we were walking out he said something like this. “Mom, I really wish you were a tiger mom who put me in lessons when I was three, and forced me to practice for two hours everyday. I would be so good now!”