Why "Educational Diversity" is Really Quotas for Asians in One Statistic

Once you move away from merit, you're gaming of the system.


Or to put it another way, here's the clamor for education diversity exposed as a sham in one statistic.

Blacks constituted 13% of the student body at Stuyvesant in 1979, 5% in 1994 and just 1% the last few years, while Hispanics dropped from a high of 4% to 2% today.

Similarly, at Bronx Science, black enrollment has fallen from 12% in 1994 to 3% currently and Hispanic enrollment has leveled off, from about 10% to 6%. The figures are even more striking at the less selective Brooklyn Tech, where blacks made up 37% of the student body in 1994 but only 8% today, while Hispanic numbers plunged from about 15% to 8%.

These declining minority numbers have not been matched by a corresponding increase in whites, however. In fact, white enrollment at Stuyvesant, Bronx Science and Brooklyn Tech has plummeted as well, dropping from 79%, 81% and 77%, respectively, in 1971 to just 22%, 23% and 20% today.

Rather, it is New York City’s fastest-growing racial minority group, Asian-Americans, who have come to dominate these schools. Asians, while always a presence in New York, didn’t begin arriving in the city in large numbers until immigration restrictions were lifted with passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, championed by Sen. Edward Kennedy.

Since then, their proportion of the city’s population has increased from less than 1% to about 13%, and their share of the specialized school population has skyrocketed. Asian students constituted 6% of the enrollment at Stuyvesant in 1970 and 50% in 1994; they make up an incredible 73% of the student body this year.

Instead of blacks and Latinos being squeezed out by whites, Asians were simply expanding. The various remedies championed by "reformers" and Bill de Blasio to increase diversity will, predictably, come at the expense of Asian students.

In the complaint and in a subsequent report released last fall to coincide with Mayor de Blasio’s election, the NAACP's LDF argues for replacement of the SHSAT with a “holistic” admissions process — one that would consider “multiple measures” of academic potential, “both quantitative and qualitative,” including not only grades but also such subjective indicators as interviews, recommendations, “portfolio assessments,” “proven leadership skills,” and “commitment to community service.”

Other factors could include applicants’ “backgrounds and experiences” and the “demographic profile” of their schools and neighborhoods. To the extent that a test would be allowed at all, it would merely “supplement” these other criteria.

In other words, garbage. The same garbage that now dominates a lot of the Ivy League. The Obamaism of writing essays about your experiences... instead of showing actual merit and ability.

This garbage is how most colleges have dodged affirmative action bans.

Now in this case what it amounts to is yet another alliance between wealthy white liberals and their minority organization affiliates against working class students trying to compete on merit, including Asian students.

A Chinese student like Ting Shi who has to help out in his parents’ Laundromat is not going on “service” trips to Nicaragua with the children in de Blasio’s affluent Park Slope neighborhood. The LDF’s suggested admissions criteria — student portfolios, leadership skills, and community service — are all subject to privileged parents’ ability to buy their children the indicia of impressiveness.

Once you move away from merit, you're dealing with straightforward gaming of the system.

A comparison of the eight most selective screened schools with the eight specialized schools shows that the screened schools, while more heavily black and Latino, are also considerably whiter and more affluent — and considerably less Asian.

Remember that the specialized schools are 13% black and Hispanic, 24% white and 60% Asian. The top screened schools are 27% black and Hispanic, 46% white and only 26% Asian.

That's what you get when posturing matters more than ability. Nationally it's how we ended up with Obama. Locally it's how we ended up with social justice warriors who know all the right buzzwords, but can't survive 5 minutes in a real skill-based competition.