What Had Happened Was Trending stories on the intersections of race, sports & culture

Affirmative action is not dead

Supreme Court upholds University of Texas’ policy

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

All Day Podcast: 6/21/16

NBA draft preview and summer movies

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

MLB

Jeter and Obama

make a great combo for interviews

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Daily Dose: 6/22/16

Lionel Messi continues his dominance in Houston

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Nick Young

is getting somewhat dragged in these streets

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Black Twitter

#BlackTwitterDate

is one of the best love stories of the year

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Daily Dose: 6/21/16

Dwyane Wade and Gabrielle Union are doing just fine

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Best hair of the Euros

It’s not the strongest field we’ve ever seen, but it isn’t bad

8:00 AMAs is the case with every international soccer tournament, hair is a big part of things when it comes to how players present themselves. We’ve got some usual suspects in the 2016 UEFA European Football Championship, with a couple new twists as well. Let’s take a look at some of our favorites.

Jerome Boateng, defender, Germany

LILLE, FRANCE - JUNE 12: Bastian Schweinsteiger of Germany talks to his team mate Jerome Boateng after the UEFA EURO 2016 Group C match between Germany and Ukraine at Stade Pierre-Mauroy on June 12, 2016 in Lille, France. (Photo by Alexander Hassenstein/Getty Images)

LILLE, FRANCE – JUNE 12: Bastian Schweinsteiger of Germany talks to his team mate Jerome Boateng after the UEFA EURO 2016 Group C match between Germany and Ukraine at Stade Pierre-Mauroy on June 12, 2016 in Lille, France. (Photo by Alexander Hassenstein/Getty Images)

Photo by Alexander Hassenstein/Getty Images

The man who’s made perhaps the best play of the tournament so far with his incredible clear off the line in Germany’s opening match against Ukraine, also happens to have a very smooth ‘do. In what I can only describe as a “conk fade,” he’s thrown in a couple racing stripes that give it a flair beyond the obvious. This is German efficiency and style at its best.

Daniel Sturridge, striker, England

LENS, FRANCE - JUNE 16: Daniel Sturridge of England celebrates England's second goal during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group B match between England and Wales at Stade Bollaert-Delelis on June 16, 2016 in Lens, France. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

LENS, FRANCE – JUNE 16: Daniel Sturridge of England celebrates England’s second goal during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group B match between England and Wales at Stade Bollaert-Delelis on June 16, 2016 in Lens, France. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images

He scored a thrilling goal as a sub to help England secure its first-ever win in the Euros after being down at half last Thursday, but his hair has been the subject of discussion for some time. Over the years, the Liverpool man has effective kept the curly flattop, while occasionally adding a few flourishes that felt like tributes to Michael Jackson, with the slightest touch of Jheri curl on them. It’s all forgiven though, because his dance is the best in the game.

Paul Pogba, midfield, France

Photo by Catherine Ivill - AMA/Getty Images; Photo by VI Images via Getty Images

Photo by Catherine Ivill – AMA/Getty Images; Photo by VI Images via Getty Images

Pogba is a legend in the on-field hair game, no questions asked. He’s gone with the gold-striped mohawk with side lettering, the leopard-print motif and the full peacock — he’s got it all in his arsenal. What’s he’s got for this tournament is relatively tame, all styles considered, but it still features his patented gold, along with his name on the other side, a nice touch. And by the way, as he told ESPN The Magazine, he wants to be the best ever, not just one of.

Divock Origi, striker, Belgium

LYON, FRANCE - JUNE 13: Divock Origi of Belgium vies with Leonardo Bonucci of Italy during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group E match between Belgium and Italy at Stade des Lumieres on June 13, 2016 in Lyon, France. (Photo by Ian MacNicol/Getty Images)

LYON, FRANCE – JUNE 13: Divock Origi of Belgium vies with Leonardo Bonucci of Italy during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group E match between Belgium and Italy at Stade des Lumieres on June 13, 2016 in Lyon, France. (Photo by Ian MacNicol/Getty Images)

The blond, faux-hawk fade certainly isn’t a style unique to American culture by way of NFL wide receiver Odell Beckham Jr. In fact, though he receives all the credit, Beckham didn’t even start the trend — but, that’s a different story. Origi has given the look a European stamp of approval with his own blond hue blended into a naturally curly mohawk (Origi has also rocked the perm in the past). Shoutout to him for telling his barber “close on the sides” to maintain the tight fade.

Éder, striker, Portugal

Eder (R) of Portugal looks on prior to the FIFA 2014 World Cup Qualifier match between Portugal and Luxembourg at Estadio Cidade de Coimbra on October 15, 2013 in Coimbra, Portugal.

Eder (R) of Portugal looks on prior to the FIFA 2014 World Cup Qualifier match between Portugal and Luxembourg at Estadio Cidade de Coimbra on October 15, 2013 in Coimbra, Portugal.

David Ramos/Getty Images

What’s so admirable about European soccer is that crazy styles of braids are still socially acceptable. Nowadays, you rarely see NFL players rock braids and, except for San Antonio Spur Kawhi Leonard, the NBA is no longer a home for braids, which Allen Iverson popularized in the league in the early 2000s. You can find, however, countless players like Portugal’s Éder on the pitch with braids flapping in the wind. The best part? The tire-tread designs that probably took hours to finesse.

Raheem Sterling, striker, England

MARSEILLE, FRANCE - JUNE 11: Raheem Sterling of England during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group B match between England and Russia at Stade Velodrome on June 11, 2016 in Marseille, France. (Photo by Catherine Ivill - AMA/Getty Images)

MARSEILLE, FRANCE – JUNE 11: Raheem Sterling of England during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group B match between England and Russia at Stade Velodrome on June 11, 2016 in Marseille, France. (Photo by Catherine Ivill – AMA/Getty Images)

Sterling’s hairdo at this year’s Euros — a high fade, grown out on the top with a side part — is pretty basic, and maybe even the least interesting on this list. But his hairstyle history? A buffet of beauty. Sterling has sported the dreads fade, the twists (word to Whoopi Goldberg) and, our personal favorite, the perm fade with the side part (word to Uncle Bobby). Keep doing your thing, Raheem. No “Make Soccer Fun Again” movement needed with that hair.

Johan Djourou, defender, Switzerland

LILLE, FRANCE - JUNE 19: Johan Djourou of Switzerland gestures during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group A match between Switzerland and France at Stade Pierre-Mauroy on June 19, 2016 in Lille, France. (Photo by Matthew Ashton - AMA/Getty Images)

LILLE, FRANCE – JUNE 19: Johan Djourou of Switzerland gestures during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group A match between Switzerland and France at Stade Pierre-Mauroy on June 19, 2016 in Lille, France. (Photo by Matthew Ashton – AMA/Getty Images)

Photo by Matthew Ashton - AMA/Getty Images

Despite being born in the Ivory Coast, Djourou is a defender for the Swiss. Inexplicably, he chooses to keep his hair at a length most men hate. He wears his hair in a starter-dreads fade. Considering the hair choices of some other Ivory-born footballers like Drogba’s perm and Gervinho’s braids, Djourou looks pretty good rocking “The In-Between Phase.”

David Alaba, defender, Austria

PARIS, FRANCE - JUNE 18: David Alaba of Austria looks on during the UEFA Euro 2016 Group F match between the Portugal and Austria at Parc des Princes on June 18, 2016 in Paris, France. (Photo by Chris Brunskill Ltd/Getty Images)

PARIS, FRANCE – JUNE 18: David Alaba of Austria looks on during the UEFA Euro 2016 Group F match between the Portugal and Austria at Parc des Princes on June 18, 2016 in Paris, France. (Photo by Chris Brunskill Ltd/Getty Images)

Photo by Chris Brunskill Ltd/Getty Images

Born in Vienna, Austria, Alaba is the son of a Nigerian prince, who is also a rapper and DJ. Alaba, Austria’s best player, also has the team’s best hair, rocking an Odell Beckham-esque, blond-tipped faux hawk. I can guarantee Alaba does not have hands like Beckham, but he looks good in the “Blonded Like Beckham” look.

Maroune Fellaini, midfield, Belgium

LYON, FRANCE - JUNE 13: Marouane Fellaini of Belgium during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group E match between Belgium and Italy at Stade des Lumieres on June 13, 2016 in Lyon, France. (Photo by Catherine Ivill - AMA/Getty Images)

LYON, FRANCE – JUNE 13: Marouane Fellaini of Belgium during the UEFA EURO 2016 Group E match between Belgium and Italy at Stade des Lumieres on June 13, 2016 in Lyon, France. (Photo by Catherine Ivill – AMA/Getty Images)

Photo by Catherine Ivill - AMA/Getty Images

Towering over most other footballers, Fellaini is conspicuous on the pitch. Belgium’s 6-foot-4 midfielder starts matches sporting “The Foxxy Cleopatra” fluffy, blond Afro. But, by the end, perspiration pulls his hair down into the “Sideshow Bob” look, also known as the “Full Varejao.”

Lastly, let’s pay homage to the G.O.A.T. of European soccer hair: former Portuguese player, and current Mozambique national team coach, Abel Xavier.

(GERMANY OUT) 30.11.1972-Sportler, Fussball, PortugalAbwehrspieler (Hannover 96)gestikuliert mit ausgestrecktem Zeigefinger. (Photo by contrast/Ralf Pollack/ullstein bild via Getty Images)

Abel Xavier. (Photo by contrast/Ralf Pollack/ullstein bild via Getty Images)

Our favorite moments since Game 7

The Cavs have won, and the celebrations are fun

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Daily Dose: 6/20/16

Believeland gets its moment

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Rome

is awash in art of all kinds, and it is quite ‘impressionante’

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Mike Tyson

gets the graffiti treatment in France

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Board on Saturday

Nike SB hits Los Angeles

to bless a couple app users with a fun surprise

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.

Which would you take?

That’s the question in ‘The Skate Pill 2’

5:12 PMIf you read all the headlines, affirmative action as we knew it was dead. When a young lady named Abigail Fisher went full privileged and took the University of Texas to court because she thought she wasn’t admitted based on the school’s policies about race, many people thought it could have marked the end of a practice that began in the 1960s, designed to level the playing field.

Alas, nope! The Supreme Court actually voted 4-3 in favor of the institution, shocking not only every black person in America, but also most of the education world, too. Before we get to Fisher getting dragged on Twitter via the #BeckyWithTheBadGrades hashtag (a twist on the previous #StayMadAbby), let’s take a look back at how ominous the expectations were among experts.

“Supreme Court Justices’ Comments Don’t Bode Well for Affirmative Action,” the New York Times surmised. “End race-based affirmative action? Yes,” the NY Daily News offered. “This Move By The Supreme Court Probably Means The End Of Affirmative Action,” Think Progress asserted. “The End of Affirmative Action?” The Atlantic wondered.

The argument, as unfortunate as it seemed, made a fair amount of sense. Maybe we’ve come far enough that we don’t need such rules anymore. Most people know that the fundamental discrimination that exists in the academic world would never be unraveled by 50 years of affirmative action, but with the Supreme Court, there’s no way to predict what will be done.

So this, in many ways, was a victory for progressives.

To be clear, Fisher not getting into that college had a lot more to do with its stringent standards, not what anyone looked like. Earlier this year, ProPublica broke down exactly why that is.

“Race probably had nothing to do with the University of Texas’ decision to deny admission to Abigail Fisher,” Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote. “In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university’s top-10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots. … But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.”

Score one for learning.