OT: DMN - Black at SMU

[rodrod5]

Rodrod5, I don't know where you are getting your surveys from in your generalizations but there is an economic issue as well. Because you can be very score high but not afford the tuition. I would hope that one day SMU could match Vandy in their student add package. I believe that would greatly help attractive high test scoring African Americans to SMU as well.

the average for black enrollment at top universities is 6%

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... dy/417189/

that is down slightly over the last few years so SMU is right there in line with others

SMU also has a very aggressive financial aid package

http://www.smu.edu/Admission/FinancialAid

75% of SMU students receive scholarships or financial aid

$26,887 is the AVERAGE financial aid package so with all the presumed "rich white kids at SMU" that are surely getting much less than that or none at all that leaves a lot of money out there to take that amount much higher than AVERAGE for those that are not wealthy or even "poor"

so what more do you really expect SMU to do should they "judge individuals based on their individuality" by lowering the admissions standards for them based simply on race or ethnicity

while it seems to bother you that so many athletes that are getting a great education for free while doing something they love happen to be black does it also bother you that so few of them are Asian or from India

surely you feel that SMU should up the recruitment of Asian and Indian athletes even if that comes at the expense of black athletes right?

and surely you are not going to try and make the claim that discriminatory or racially biased testing and high school education systems that are designed to favor the "majority" or the "power broker ethnic group" somehow was allowed to be manipulated by Asian and Indian students so that the actually outperform the "majority" and the "power brokers" in society.....this even wen including the economically poor and first generation members of those groups in the numbers.....but then those groups generally look to education as a way out of poverty instead of athletics and music......perhaps you and others can show them "the error of their ways" and then we can have more diverse athletics teams in college sports and more diversity in musical buffoonery

[rodrod5]

Picture of SMU Affirmative Action Policy in practice-these are the guys we support with our time and money through ticket sales and scholarship donations-isn't it a little hypocritical to deny other African-Americans the opportunities we afford these guys who we cheer for every game and denounce Affirmative Action as wrong?

http://grfx.cstv.com/schools/smu/graphi ... ter-14.jpg

(same could be said about many universities)

how exactly is SMU denying other blacks the same opportunity?

and isn't it worse that there is not a single Asian or Indian in the mix there perhaps SMU is really doing a disservice to Asians and people from India by denying them a chance to shine in the athletics arena

it is amazing that some are ignorant enough to take the fact that SMU is giving a free ride to a group of students with sports as a denial of others for that same opportunity

if you can't do it academically AND you can't do it athletically then perhaps you should accept that you get an opportunity at community college or a HBCU or a university that admits just about anyone with a pulse

why should SMU just offer an opportunity to those that can't get it done academically or athletically based solely on their race or ethnic group and economics is not a factor because again the AVERAGE financial aid package at SMU is $26,887 and that covers a lot of tuition and housing and that is the AVERAGE so "the poor" are probably getting well above that

perhaps it is time for some groups to have a "collective" look at their priorities and their own actions and accountability before they ask others to afford them opportunity based solely on their race or ethnic background when they have not made the effort or the grades to have that opportunity as an individual based on academic metrics or even athletics prowess

[Rebel10]

Rodrod5, I don't know where you are getting your surveys from in your generalizations but there is an economic issue as well. Because you can be very score high but not afford the tuition. I would hope that one day SMU could match Vandy in their student add package. I believe that would greatly help attractive high test scoring African Americans to SMU as well.

the average for black enrollment at top universities is 6%

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... dy/417189/

that is down slightly over the last few years so SMU is right there in line with others

SMU also has a very aggressive financial aid package

http://www.smu.edu/Admission/FinancialAid

75% of SMU students receive scholarships or financial aid

$26,887 is the AVERAGE financial aid package so with all the presumed "rich white kids at SMU" that are surely getting much less than that or none at all that leaves a lot of money out there to take that amount much higher than AVERAGE for those that are not wealthy or even "poor"

so what more do you really expect SMU to do should they "judge individuals based on their individuality" by lowering the admissions standards for them based simply on race or ethnicity

while it seems to bother you that so many athletes that are getting a great education for free while doing something they love happen to be black does it also bother you that so few of them are Asian or from India

surely you feel that SMU should up the recruitment of Asian and Indian athletes even if that comes at the expense of black athletes right?

and surely you are not going to try and make the claim that discriminatory or racially biased testing and high school education systems that are designed to favor the "majority" or the "power broker ethnic group" somehow was allowed to be manipulated by Asian and Indian students so that the actually outperform the "majority" and the "power brokers" in society.....this even wen including the economically poor and first generation members of those groups in the numbers.....but then those groups generally look to education as a way out of poverty instead of athletics and music......perhaps you and others can show them "the error of their ways" and then we can have more diverse athletics teams in college sports and more diversity in musical buffoonery

President Turner noted in the article that Vandy has a $37,000 package with helps them. And you are either missing or twisting my point. Point is that it if you recruit black athletes that hard for athletics it would seem like more can be done to recruit regular students. As Stallion said it seems hypocritical, no matter the college. Like I said Hispanic scores are about the same as African American scores but there are about twice as many at SMU. But if it helps you you can twist it however you like.

[rodrod5]

Rodrod5, I don't know where you are getting your surveys from in your generalizations but there is an economic issue as well. Because you can be very score high but not afford the tuition. I would hope that one day SMU could match Vandy in their student add package. I believe that would greatly help attractive high test scoring African Americans to SMU as well.

the average for black enrollment at top universities is 6%

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... dy/417189/

that is down slightly over the last few years so SMU is right there in line with others

SMU also has a very aggressive financial aid package

http://www.smu.edu/Admission/FinancialAid

75% of SMU students receive scholarships or financial aid

$26,887 is the AVERAGE financial aid package so with all the presumed "rich white kids at SMU" that are surely getting much less than that or none at all that leaves a lot of money out there to take that amount much higher than AVERAGE for those that are not wealthy or even "poor"

so what more do you really expect SMU to do should they "judge individuals based on their individuality" by lowering the admissions standards for them based simply on race or ethnicity

while it seems to bother you that so many athletes that are getting a great education for free while doing something they love happen to be black does it also bother you that so few of them are Asian or from India

surely you feel that SMU should up the recruitment of Asian and Indian athletes even if that comes at the expense of black athletes right?

and surely you are not going to try and make the claim that discriminatory or racially biased testing and high school education systems that are designed to favor the "majority" or the "power broker ethnic group" somehow was allowed to be manipulated by Asian and Indian students so that the actually outperform the "majority" and the "power brokers" in society.....this even wen including the economically poor and first generation members of those groups in the numbers.....but then those groups generally look to education as a way out of poverty instead of athletics and music......perhaps you and others can show them "the error of their ways" and then we can have more diverse athletics teams in college sports and more diversity in musical buffoonery

President Turner noted in the article that Vandy has a $37,000 package with helps them. And you are either missing or twisting my point. Point is that it if you recruit black athletes that hard for athletics it would seem like more can be done to recruit regular students. As Stallion said it seems hypocritical, no matter the college. Like I said Hispanic scores are about the same as African American scores but there area about twice as many at SMU. But if it helps you you can twist it however you like.

well SMU has a $26,887 package on AVERAGE and that is nothing to sneeze at....perhaps if you are not happy with that amount you can step up with your checkbook and make a large donation and up that amount closer to Vanderbilt

and perhaps SMU needs to recruit fewer black athletes and get the population of black athletes down closer to the overall population of the USA or even the population of the general student population at SMU and at the same time recruit more Hispanic, Asian and Indian athletes if we really want "diversity" and "fairness".....or are we up to the tired argument where "diversity means blacks" yet

[Rebel10]

well SMU has a $26,887 package on AVERAGE and that is nothing to sneeze at....perhaps if you are not happy with that amount you can step up with your checkbook and make a large donation and up that amount closer to Vanderbilt

and perhaps SMU needs to recruit fewer black athletes and get the population of black athletes down closer to the overall population of the USA or even the population of the general student population at SMU and at the same time recruit more Hispanic, Asian and Indian athletes if we really want "diversity" and "fairness".....or are we up to the tired argument where "diversity means blacks" yet

I do make contributions every year so I do my part and SMU is an above average university not average so I hope strides are being made to catch schools like Vandy. I mean where would we be if SMU recruited black athletes like we do our regular students (like 5% on the hoops etc), we would probably not be in the AAC. I am sure you would be okay with that. And the getting in the AAC has helped SMU increase revenues So it is not about recruiting less black athletes but improving recruiting the regular students. There is room for improvement and not just for SMU.

[gostangs]

THere are twice as many hispanics to choose from which is why their percentage within SMU is higher.

The issue is not an SMU issue. THe issue is that AA are 14% of the population, but are a much smaller percentage of the college ready population, and an even smaller percentage of the academically achieving college ready population. Every university in the country is trying to attract that same very small percentage, and when they get a full ride offer from Stanford or Vandy they take it over our full ride offer.

It is VERY difficult to raise this percentage without a bigger pool to offer. That it is that small is a societal problem, or a cultural problem or something else entirely different - but it is not an SMU issue. Not saying we can't do better, but it is very hard to move this needle and we have been trying for a long time.

You could always exclude 150 deserving students of whatever race to make room for just any old AA student and see our average student quality drop and our ratings drop - but i don't think that is the direction most think we should go.

[Rebel10]

THere are twice as many hispanics to choose from which is why their percentage within SMU is higher.

The issue is not an SMU issue. THe issue is that AA are 14% of the population, but are a much smaller percentage of the college ready population, and an even smaller percentage of the academically achieving college ready population. Every university in the country is trying to attract that same very small percentage, and when they get a full ride offer from Stanford or Vandy they take it over our full ride offer.

It is VERY difficult to raise this percentage without a bigger pool to offer. That it is that small is a societal problem, or a cultural problem or something else entirely different - but it is not an SMU issue. Not saying we can't do better, but it is very hard to move this needle and we have been trying for a long time.

You could always exclude 150 deserving students of whatever race to make room for just any old AA student and see our average student quality drop and our ratings drop - but i don't think that is the direction most think we should go.

I don't believe that the Hispanic population is 28% which would be twice as many. Hispanics make up 17% of the population. So they are doing something reach out to them and make very good strikes there. Not trying to argue just having constructive dialogue. Also 37,000 at Vandy is not a free ride but it helps a lot. Generally it is economics and I think that is why President Turner made that comment and from what it sounds like he may try to get closer to Vandy.

[rodrod5]

THere are twice as many hispanics to choose from which is why their percentage within SMU is higher.

The issue is not an SMU issue. THe issue is that AA are 14% of the population, but are a much smaller percentage of the college ready population, and an even smaller percentage of the academically achieving college ready population. Every university in the country is trying to attract that same very small percentage, and when they get a full ride offer from Stanford or Vandy they take it over our full ride offer.

It is VERY difficult to raise this percentage without a bigger pool to offer. That it is that small is a societal problem, or a cultural problem or something else entirely different - but it is not an SMU issue. Not saying we can't do better, but it is very hard to move this needle and we have been trying for a long time.

You could always exclude 150 deserving students of whatever race to make room for just any old AA student and see our average student quality drop and our ratings drop - but i don't think that is the direction most think we should go.

I don't believe that the Hispanic population is 28% which would be twice as many. Hispanics make up 17% of the population. So they are doing something reach out to them and make very good strikes there. Not trying to argue just having constructive dialogue. Also 37,000 at Vandy is not a free ride but it helps a lot. Generally it is economics and I think that is why President Turner made that comment and from what it sounds like he may try to get closer to Vandy.

Vanderbilt also has a $4.1 billion dollar endowment while SMU has a $1.5 billion dollar endowment so Vanderbilt has about $130 million more per year in endowment income to toss around not to mention that Vanderbilt is about 18% larger than SMU so Vanderbilt is getting some economies of scale out of their overhead and Vanderbilt is about $2,500 more a year in tuition so they have some of their "rich" students carrying more of the freight for the "poor" as well

it is laughable to pretend that SMU needs to be called out on their recruitment of black students or any other group for that matter when they are in line with the national averages for the most part and they offer an extremely aggressive financial aid package

[Stallion]

probably-but it is fair to call out those that want to end Affirmative Action or cut primary school funding. This is a much bigger problem than SMU.

[Rebel10]

THere are twice as many hispanics to choose from which is why their percentage within SMU is higher.

The issue is not an SMU issue. THe issue is that AA are 14% of the population, but are a much smaller percentage of the college ready population, and an even smaller percentage of the academically achieving college ready population. Every university in the country is trying to attract that same very small percentage, and when they get a full ride offer from Stanford or Vandy they take it over our full ride offer.

It is VERY difficult to raise this percentage without a bigger pool to offer. That it is that small is a societal problem, or a cultural problem or something else entirely different - but it is not an SMU issue. Not saying we can't do better, but it is very hard to move this needle and we have been trying for a long time.

You could always exclude 150 deserving students of whatever race to make room for just any old AA student and see our average student quality drop and our ratings drop - but i don't think that is the direction most think we should go.

I don't believe that the Hispanic population is 28% which would be twice as many. Hispanics make up 17% of the population. So they are doing something reach out to them and make very good strikes there. Not trying to argue just having constructive dialogue. Also 37,000 at Vandy is not a free ride but it helps a lot. Generally it is economics and I think that is why President Turner made that comment and from what it sounds like he may try to get closer to Vandy.

Vanderbilt also has a $4.1 billion dollar endowment while SMU has a $1.5 billion dollar endowment so Vanderbilt has about $130 million more per year in endowment income to toss around not to mention that Vanderbilt is about 18% larger than SMU so Vanderbilt is getting some economies of scale out of their overhead and Vanderbilt is about $2,500 more a year in tuition so they have some of their "rich" students carrying more of the freight for the "poor" as well

it is laughable to pretend that SMU needs to be called out on their recruitment of black students or any other group for that matter when they are in line with the national averages for the most part and they offer an extremely aggressive financial aid package

Extremely aggressive compared to who? Schools usually get what they work hard for. Example your article specifically said that those schools are recruiting more Hispanics and they are getting more Hispanics. It may might be laughable to you because you may not care one way or the other just that they come here to play sports. Population 15% African American and 17% Hispanic but you have twice as many Hispanics enrolled with there is no noticeable difference in test scores. Like I said if your attitude is like most administrations I can see the issue here. You get what you recruit just ask any coach.

[rodrod5]

I thought you said it was average now you are saying it is extremely aggressive. Make up your mind. Schools usually get what they work hard for. Example your article specifically said that those schools are recruiting more Hispanics and they are getting more Hispanics. It may might be laughable to you because you may not care one way or the other just that they come here to play sports. Population 15% African American and 17% Hispanic but you have twice as many Hispanics enrolled with there is no noticeable difference in test scores. Like I said if your attitude is like most administrations I can see the issue here. You get what you recruit just ask any coach.

are you really this dense?

the AVERAGE aid package is the AVERAGE AMOUNT THAT SMU STUDENTS ON FINANCIAL AID RECEIVE.....IE it is an AVERAGE OF THE TOTAL SMU GIVES TO STUDENTS DIVIDED BY THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ON AID

3 out of 4 students at SMU are on some type of scholarship or financial aid so that means that 25% are paying a full ride from their own pocket

that means that 75% are getting some type of scholarship or need based financial aid and of those 75% the AVERAGE AMOUNT is the $26K and change.......that is not "average" amount relative to the vast majority of schools public or private even if a few like Vanderbilt with $2.6 BILLION more in endowment are giving more that is still an extremely aggressive amount of money and a large % of students getting something
IT IS NOT "AVERAGE" relative to other universities

[Rebel10]

I thought you said it was average now you are saying it is extremely aggressive. Make up your mind. Schools usually get what they work hard for. Example your article specifically said that those schools are recruiting more Hispanics and they are getting more Hispanics. It may might be laughable to you because you may not care one way or the other just that they come here to play sports. Population 15% African American and 17% Hispanic but you have twice as many Hispanics enrolled with there is no noticeable difference in test scores. Like I said if your attitude is like most administrations I can see the issue here. You get what you recruit just ask any coach.

are you really this dense?

the AVERAGE aid package is the AVERAGE AMOUNT THAT SMU STUDENTS ON FINANCIAL AID RECEIVE.....IE it is an AVERAGE OF THE TOTAL SMU GIVES TO STUDENTS DIVIDED BY THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ON AID

3 out of 4 students at SMU are on some type of scholarship or financial aid so that means that 25% are paying a full ride from their own pocket

that means that 75% are getting some type of scholarship or need based financial aid and of those 75% the AVERAGE AMOUNT is the $26K and change.......that is not "average" amount relative to the vast majority of schools public or private even if a few like Vanderbilt with $2.6 BILLION more in endowment are giving more that is still an extremely aggressive amount of money and a large % of students getting something
IT IS NOT "AVERAGE" relative to other universities

I saw that and edited it to say extremely aggressive compared to who? But regardless of that to you still have not answered the Hispanic question. Read to rest of my statement and respond it if you care to. Not just a selective portion.

[RGV Pony]

Feels like I'm watching tennis

[rodrod5]

http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/de ... report.pdf

–
In 2012-13 undergraduate students received an average of
$13,730 per full-time equivalent (FTE) student in financial aid,
including $7,190 in grants from all sources and $4,900
in federal loans.

so the AVERAGE that SMU students receive is double the national average

the SMU site does not state if any of that is loans or what % if any is loans....BUT it does specifically state "scholarships" which would not be loans and also it specifies NEED BASED financial aid and generally loans even federal student loans are not "need based" since they are repaid thus it is very clear that SMU offering twice the national average is very aggressive all the more so when most of that is likely NOT in the form of loans since it specifies "need based" while the quoted number for the national average does include loans without any mention of "need based"

also the above number is "normalized" for a FTE which for undergrads is 15 credit hours and what that means is since a large % of overall college students across the USA do not take 15 credit hours per semester there are actually many more students getting lesser dollars and when you normalize it to a per FTE number you increase the average dollars while at a small private school like SMU there will be many more students than average taking 12+ hours so the "average" for SMU is more representative of what an individual student gets VS the above quoted national average that is normalized per FTE so SMU on a per actual student basis is really even higher than what appears to be a "national average"

and before you make some less than salient comment about SMU costing more.....well here is a clue it cost more to have a 10 or 12 to 1 student to faculty ratio Vs twice that....it cost more to have classes taught by a very high % of tenured or tenure track faculty VS graduate students and TAs and adjuncts and it cost more to not have classes of 200 to 300+ students and it cost more to have faculty that actually want to teach and that have been vetted for their ability to teach Vs having 3 or sometimes 2 letters after their name and it cost more to have newer equipment and other resources shared by a much smaller number of students for a more hands on educational experience

and as to "hispanic students" Texas is far and away well above the national average of hispanics while Texas is not that much different in % of blacks as a total population and in Texas "hispanics" have long been a large % of the population and in places like San Antonio many of them can come from wealthy families either from coming here from Mexico wealthy a few generations back and maintaining and increasing that wealth or coming here more recently as wealthy families

so of course it will be easier for SMU to recruit a more similar % of hispanic students relative to the general population because in Texas hispanics are generally more representative of the general population

[Rebel10]

http://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/student-aid-2013-full-report.pdf

–
In 2012-13 undergraduate students received an average of
$13,730 per full-time equivalent (FTE) student in financial aid,
including $7,190 in grants from all sources and $4,900
in federal loans.

so the AVERAGE that SMU students receive is double the national average

the SMU site does not state if any of that is loans or what % if any is loans....BUT it does specifically state "scholarships" which would not be loans and also it specifies NEED BASED financial aid and generally loans even federal student loans are not "need based" since they are repaid thus it is very clear that SMU offering twice the national average is very aggressive all the more so when most of that is likely NOT in the form of loans since it specifies "need based" while the quoted number for the national average does include loans without any mention of "need based"

and before you make some less than salient comment about SMU costing more.....well here is a clue it cost more to have a 10 or 12 to 1 student to faculty ratio Vs twice that....it cost more to have classes taught by a very high % of tenured or tenure track faculty VS graduate students and TAs and adjuncts and it cost more to not have classes of 200 to 300+ students and it cost more to have faculty that actually want to teach and that have been vetted for their ability to teach Vs having 3 or sometimes 2 letters after their name and it cost more to have newer equipment and other resources shared by a much smaller number of students for a more hands on educational experience

So you admit cost is still a factor even though you do get more money. Good to have quality even though you have to pay more. No problem with that, that is if SMU has a high number of tenured professors compared to others. Also I thought we reached beyond Texas for recruiting. Example from my understanding about 25 to 30 percentage of SMU students are from California. I mean 52 incoming students a year over 4 years would be 208. 208 out of 6400 would be about 3.3% which would be worse than UT or A&M. I hope we can improve.