<p>@awcntdb, yes, those certainly are issues. My daughter commented after being admitted to one of the few non-male-dominated programs she applied to, “I feel really good about that because at least I know I it wasn’t because I’m a girl.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>URM being viewed as less intelligent long predated the introduction of racial preference as a factor in college admissions. A brief glance at history would be enough to illustrate that. </p>
<p>Also, this view exists in many quarters even regarding students attending schools where there is no holistic admissions. Case in point, my public magnet HS where everyone admitted met/exceeded the exact same test cutoff score and the summer prep program for low-income students* had been eliminated for nearly a decade due to education department wrangling. </p>
<p>If anything, this mentality is much worse within the last 5 years than it was when I attended that HS according to HS teachers still teaching there and older alums with near daily contact on account of their jobs. </p>
<p>Ironic considering it’s much more competitive to get in nowadays considering many more students are applying compared to my day and they reduced incoming freshman classes by 100 seats. </p>
<ul>
<li>Incidentally, the vast majority of attendees of this prep program were of various European and Asian ethnic groups according to published statistics.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>@cobrat - Because an issue predates a current situation does not mean we need to reinforce or possibly even make worse. </p>
<p>@mathyone - Your daughter voiced what many students are now trained to think, and that is unfortunate because implicit in her statement is a dismissal of her abilities and worth as an individual; she reduced herself to just a girl. </p>
<p>@awcntdb, I think you left out one of my main points ( while pulling another, #4, out of context). I wrote;</p>
<p>“I like to think think that is what your average black community leader is about. Not the individual student, but the whole. Again, I get that that is not what CC is about…having the numbers, opportunity, and money seems far rarer than the anecdotal experience of those on CC. I am willing to live with the “shame” of affirmative action until the numbers increase.”</p>
<p>I believe I acknowledged that CC is not about the greater good; it is about the individual student, and I get that the individual students may suffer, at least for a time. The cost to students aspiring to, or attending elite colleges might be more than they should have to bear. </p>
<p>But my main point is, that outside of CC, and the kind of folks that are seeking admission to elite schools, the cost to society in general does not seem great. That is the vast, vast majority of the country, if not the world. </p>
<p>
Most definitions of success in college would show a notable correlation with graduating. Graduation rates showed a similar pattern to GPA with SAT II being more important than SAT I for STEM majors. One interesting difference is SAT I verbal showed a negative correlation with graduating in all majors. That is if candidates have equal grades, math SAT, and SAT II scores, parents income/education, …; the applicant with the lower SAT verbal had the better predicted chance of graduating (within a specific number of years). All SAT I tests and math SAT II showed a negative correlation with graduating for most non-STEM majors. I wonder if this relates to being weaker in other non-stat areas that were not included. Perhaps the low test score admits were more likely to have other areas in their application that helped the university overlook the lower test scores, and those other areas show a notable correlation with persisting through college and graduating, leading to an increased graduation rate. It might also relate to higher test score applicants being more likely to take time off for internships and other grad delay activities. Example coefficients for math/science majors are below:</p>
<p>Math and Physical Science Majors: Grad Rate
HS GPA - 0.22
SAT II Writing - 0.11 (sampled when writing was SAT II)
SAT II Math - 0.10
SAT II 3rd Test - 0.06
SAT I Math - 0.06
Parents Education - 0.04
Parents Income - 0.02
SAT I Verbal - (-0.06)</p>
<p>There is much to think about in your post. But let’s remember: if you go to any elite campus, black and hispanic minority students are still very much a minority so I think sometimes the admissions boost they receive is blown way out of proportion. As I said in a previous post, I think the sense of unfairness some students feel comes from comparing their admits to that of their classmates, where background (whether minority or legacy) seems to have trumped more objective measures. But I don’t think that, once on campus, a white student views a fellow black student with resentment. Maybe I’m naive about that, but I just don’t see it. </p>
<p>What does really bother me, really to the point of moral queasiness, is that I think there is a minority that is clearly, absolutely discriminated against (as in: we don’t want more of your kind here). And that group is Asians. I think it is, frankly, unAmerican for a worthy student to be denied admission due to ethnicity. And you can couch it however you want (“holistic admissions” “well-roundedness”) but, if you look at the statistics for Ivy League schools, Asians are way under-represented in relation to the quality of their applications. There are so many unbelievably qualified Asian applicants that the number who actually get admitted really constitutes tokenism. This is the problem with thinking about people as members of a certain group rather than as individuals. The playing field is not level and this is at the expense of incredibly talented, hard-working folks who have an enormous amount to contribute to this country. I think history is going to look very unkindly on this anti-Asian discrimination in college admissions. (And btw, I am not Asian.)</p>
<p>Data: <a href=“Black Student Graduation Rates at High-Ranking Colleges and Universities : The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education”>http://www.jbhe.com/2013/11/black-student-graduation-rates-at-high-ranking-colleges-and-universities/</a></p>
<p>Fond: I don’t see Asian-American bias on the front end of admissions. None of the CC sort of sentiments about , oh, drat, another Asian kid who plays tennis and violin. PLUS, again, you are making “quality” assumptions based on quantitative. The great bulk of the pool after first-cut is 4.0, high enough stats.</p>
<p>Merit isn’t a matter of the highest GPA and test scores. This entire conversation continually falls into the trap of arguing merit can be simply determined. The universities are clear on many of the qualities they seek. They are not looking for the best resumes in the pile.</p>
<p>From Harvard’s Admissions web portal, under the heading “what we look for,” Harvard’s Admissions team has posted an essay by Helen Vendler, former member of the Faculty Standing Committee on Admissions.
<a href=“https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/apply/what-we-look/valuing-creative-reflective[/url]”>https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/apply/what-we-look/valuing-creative-reflective</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>awcntdb: I am walking out the door and simply don’t have time to respond to your lengthy post – I certainly hope others will. I disagree with much of it – I think if we changed things to how you seem to want it (admit the top SAT and GPA kids), well, I just don’t think everyone will be happy. Are kids unhappy now, a few days after getting their rejections: yes. But talk to many of these kids a year later, and they’ll be happy and content at their school. </p>
<p>But I really really disagree with this statement: “This is the flip-side of the asian problem; this group feels advantaged and superior in the college admissions process.”</p>
<p>I’m really hoping (I forgot her screenname) New Haven CT mom sees this and responds. Perhaps there are a few smug minorities out there. I think they are very rare indeed. As she has said several times on this thread: Walk around a college campus. Visit Yale and Harvard. What you’ll see is handful of students of color, and thousands of Asians and Indians and whites. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, I am used to ‘white’ being considered the absence of color, but since when were Asians and Indians (who btw are also Asians) colorless? And furthermore, most of the ‘Asians and Indians’ are Americans.</p>
<p>I think that was discussed on page three or so. Not so much the absence of color, but more about do non black and Hispanic kids get invited to diversity events. I think they do, especially where the environment thinks it will help in their mission. </p>
<p>@Jssaab1, fantastic post. And it’s sad that so many people here would be surprised that a student from St. Olaf could be that accomplished. Those of us who have gone through this process with the primary focus on what these schools can offer our kids, without regard to bragging rights know about the St. Olafs of the world. And there are lots of them.</p>
<p>awcntdb - I am so flabbergasted by your POV I don’t know where to start. I am convinced my URM D was admitted to all her top tier choices because she had NO expectations of advantage. She would not, nor would we allow her, to attend an institution at which she is less than qualified. Any URM student I have met is THRILLED to get the chance to attend a prestigious university. It is only the overrepresented majority that feels they can (and should) control the system.</p>
<p>Your post oozes contempt and a disconnect from the reality of modern America.</p>
<p>Yes! Glad to hear about a thriving Ole. (and not surprised) Full need plus merit for anyone who wants to know.</p>
<p>awcntdb: I, too, am not going to respond to everything I disagree with in your lengthy post, but your position on poor and lower working class people seems clear from your comment on how the minimum wage would necessarily decrease jobs. Many analysts (even those from Goldman Sachs, not exactly a liberal think tank) say the effect on jobs would be minimal and the impact on the working poor very beneficial. Which would help the economy as a whole. </p>
<p>It is still not at all clear how you would advocate the elite schools distinguish among all the 4.0+, 2300+, vals that would apply. Is not life experience one important factor? </p>
<p>Data: How can parental income have such a limited impact on graduation rate when there is a wealth of evidence that poor students have a hard time finishing, much more likely to drop out due to costs or other factors. Or is this study just of a few select schools that meet full need?</p>
<p>@awntcb I agree with @fireandrain You state "Is the damage to the overall college community worth it?</p>
<p>@awntcb Said<<<For me, whatever is being advocating in the college admissions process under the term diversity is not worth the fundamental and visible damage being wrought to students’ spirits, their feeling of self-worth and the resulting stigma placed on the groups, which are seen to get an advantage, and to the college fabric, as a whole.</p>
<p>If this is what is called societal advancement, then please, by all means, keep it.">>></p>
<p>Damage?, that’s what you call dealing with what life hands you? African Americans are 17% of the populations and represent only 5% of college students (7% at the Ivys). Do you feel that someone should go to college that is completely devoid of representation of 17% of the population just because their parents are no good or non-existent, their schools are dangerous places, their GC just care that they show up etc etc. You think they deserve what they have been handed. If you do, I don’t think you deserve what you have. It’s pretty petty sour grapes to blame what you lose on what someone else gets. You will do fine attending another school ( as I said in my fabulous student post) probably equal to what an AA student gets in perceived advantage by attending an Ivy.</p>
<p>Note: stats show AA students attending better schools are attracted to jobs that give back. Speculation exists that even with a top level education they are shut out of higher level positions due to the good ole boys networks not accepting them anyway, Ivy educated or not ( perception that they got in by “checking the box”, could be?. Some want to share and try to bring others up, that I commend.</p>
<p>What you call damage to spirit I CALL ENLARGEMENT OF CHARACTER, and it is needed for anyone who feels they deserve anything, ever.</p>
<p>I know many kids from my IVY that never ever ate with a person of color in their lives before college, and most never even spoke to one. Do you think that sets them up for a successful life/career? I took a job in Memphis where whites are in the minority ( 30% vs 70) I can tell you if you don’t know how to work with people different than you you would have no chance to be successful in a position like that where more than half of your staff ( some college grads) are not white.</p>
<p>Lastly, Asians are 5% of the population and get 17% of Ivy spots, if everything were fair they would get 50% is that how things should work, their “stats” are better so they deserve to go? I cannot fathom a company where only one race had all the jobs and everyone else was subordinate , oh wait, that’s what we have now, except its so white it blinds people at times to how the decks are stacked in one direction. How does that not damage one’s spirit and keep them from even trying???</p>
<p>“What does really bother me, really to the point of moral queasiness, is that I think there is a minority that is clearly, absolutely discriminated against (as in: we don’t want more of your kind here). And that group is Asians. I think it is, frankly, unAmerican for a worthy student to be denied admission due to ethnicity.”</p>
<p>Worthy students HAVE to be denied somehow because these schools have only so many beds. I don’t know what part of “there aren’t enough beds” is difficult to grasp here.</p>
<p>You are also missing the crucial distinction between “we don’t want your kind here” (such as Jewish quotas in the early 20th century at some elite schools) and “we want more of all different types”. There is a huge, huge moral distinction and difference. </p>
<p>BTW, what’s the “fair” % of (insert ethnic group of your liking)? Is your reference point –
A) % of that ethnic group in the population in the overall US?
B) % of that ethnic group in the population in the general geographic area of the college in question?
C) % of that ethnic group in the applicant pool at that college?</p>
<p>This is a huge philosophical question here.
If it’s A, then Asians (and Jews for that matter) are highly overrepresented in elite colleges.
If it’s B, then does that mean it’s ok for (for example) Dartmouth in rural NH to have fewer Asians than Stanford in the Bay Area?
If it’s C, does that mean that if the applicant pool is 80% Asian, the acceptance pool should be so, too?</p>
<p>I have twins at different, but both elite, schools - both in suburbs of major cities.
D’s school is probably 35% Asian, maybe 8-10% Jewish.
S’s school is probably 25% Jewish, maybe 18% Asian.<br>
Which of those numbers are “fair”? Should they be the same? Why or why not?</p>
<p>To those who responded to my post about anti-Asian discrimination by pointing out that admissions isn’t/shouldn’t be based solely on gpa and sat scores–I agree! But I believe that the emphasis on being “holistic” is also a cover that is used to justify discrimination. People who are in power do not like to give it up. And if decisions were “ethnic blind” I believe the top schools would probably be overwhelmingly Asian. Perhaps it’s unconscious, but I think there is a discomfort with that outcome and this leads to an over-emphasis on holistic-ness as a way of keeping the Asian admits at a certain level. These schools are practicing social engineering and I think in the long run it will hurt their prestige. The worthy students who are shut out due to their ethnicity will just “bring home” the Nobels to Berkeley rather than Brown!</p>
<p>@pizzagirl If anyone thinks that one group DESERVES to have anything, due to stats, color, whatever, they are missing the point. Maybe the culture of a particular group would not fulfill what the school ( company/world) needs. Say every one of the Asians applying to the tops schools said they wanted to go into medicine ( and ask yourself, I think disproportionately so even the accomplished musician Asian may writes that in their essay - thinking hypothetically) Would it best serve the school and society to let them all in. Would it be good medicine if all were doctors? Would they be able to understand, be interested in, the plight of all their patients? Did any say they wanted to go into teaching, art history, latin? Maybe these admission folks suspect that a student with 2200+ Sat over achiever who says they want to be an archaeologist who was president of his schools pre-med society has alternative goals? Do we need that many doctors Lawyers/computer/whatever? If they did say it was for one of those things was that a genuine attraction or just a back-door ploy, what have they done to show that passion in that area? </p>
<p>All I am saying is that tops schools feel they are fulfilling a need, but not the needs of super-achieving students, needs of society ( true or false, they know the stakes) And believe it or not, society needs a little diversity, not a world full of high-achieving xxxx race, color, creed. Sometime diversity comes in the form of someone different than you having the edge for once…</p>