<p>@awcntdb I can see that you’re very sincere in your viewpoint, and that you are trying to make sense of what, to you, seems to be a dysfunctional even harmful system. </p>
<p>My question to you is two-fold:</p>
<p>1) Is stress and strain always negative? (Hint: Civil War, Stonewall Riot, middle school in general for any kid who has ever suffered for liking math more than basketball)</p>
<p>2) Can you suggest a system that is inherently selective and elitist (hence, the term “elite universities”) that leaves no one feeling left out? (If you can…please, please, please go into politics!)</p>
<p>I’m being a little flippant, but I do think it’s important to realize that, in the words of a famous philosopher, “you can’t always get what you want…but if you try sometimes you can get what you need.” </p>
<p>I would not be surprised if UC historically met in-state need, given that UC is part of California’s master plan for higher education which strongly emphasizes opportunities to go to college for those from lower income backgrounds. Remember that the California master plan was influenced by the earlier Governor Brown, who did not like the fact that he could not go to college because he could not afford it (though he did complete a law degree at night, back when one could go to law school without a bachelor’s degree and when non-top-14 law degrees actually improved one’s employability in law).</p>
<p>However, inequality of educational opportunity based on family income is real, and the likely effect of that probably occurs earlier, in that students from low income families are less likely to complete K-12 school having done well enough to qualify for admission to UC (and similarly to CSU).</p>
<p>GFG, it has nothing to do with interesting or boring. It has to do with HOW MANY kids of what types there are when admissions is looking to admit and what they want. Nothing to do with being Asian. It’s just that many of those kids, when being categorized can be put into the same stack and there are far more of them than there are spaces. </p>
<p>Just talked to my brother’s friend who is upset. Son is a great student, top student. Applied ED to a very specific engineering program Got into the school but not the program, and apparently this happens enough that the school allowed that exception to the ED commitment. Well, a female classmate with isn’t even close in over all stats or academic prowess, was accepted RD to that very program.Also she got a scholarship with her GTech acceptance, and he did not. Kind of a slap in the face, but as I showed in an earlier post, being a female is a significant advantage in engineering programs. MIT gives females a significant edge–which, as I mentioned also in an earlier post, that she was shut out of MIT was not because of her gender which did confer an advantage not a dis in her app there. </p>
<p>My son applied to Musical Theatre programs some years ago,and with some programs accepting as few as 10 kids, it really comes down to what a specific school wants and the cuts have to be made when there are hundreds of kids for each spot. Nothing to do with the calibre of each kid. Would take 'em all if they could.</p>
<p>As for some of these kids, and I saw this clearly demonstrated at a Chinese social club meeting, take identifying info out of the resumes and the parents can’t even pick their kids apps out of the stack. Yes, there are a number of apps that have enough similarities that it’s real easy to stack them as similar, and it can become a lottery to pick the few out of that stack for the spots left. </p>
<p>@ucbalumnus – I’d also think that lower income kids in California are probably generally more likely to opt for CSU’s - especially at the time that the study was done, when CSU’s really were a bargain. It really was financially feasible for a student to pay their own way through college working part time and living at home. Back in the 80’s & 90’s I used to preferentially hire CSU students over UC students because the CSU students all had more work experience on their resumes. I don’t think the UC’s ever were that great for financial aid – but room & board has pretty much always cost more than tuition, so that might be the barrier to attendance in the first place. </p>
<p>For the low-income students who do want to attend UC’s, the CC to UC transfer is a much more common (and more economical) path. I don’t know if the study you cite would have included that cohort. </p>
<p>@EllieMom - Let me tackle your first question.</p>
<p>The examples you gave are not analogous to what is being discussed here because of one simple word: helplessness. None of your examples engender that sentiment.</p>
<p>True that stress and strain are not always negative, but facing adversity, stress and strain, which one can actually fight back against is what fosters growth. Growth is not fostered when one feels he is up against a system or position, which he can devise no way to combat and for which he has no tools to fight back.</p>
<p>Bottom line is what students are feeling is helplessness against a system that seems to hitting them personally for no fault of their own. No growth will come from that; what will come from that is a person who feels slighted and pushed aside in favor of someone else. That does not strike me as any place to begin promoting integration, which I gather is the goal of these programs. </p>
<p>Maybe I am nuts, but how one would think to promote integration on the college campus by first instituting segregation via the college application process is beyond my thinking skills. But, please do not take my word for it, read the profiles of students and read for yourself show they feel about the application process; nothing integrating about it.</p>
<p>I agree “you can’t always get what you want,” but that does not preclude one from not making it worse, which is where we are, I believe. Not to be flippant in return, but the statement of “When in a hole best stop digging” comes to mind.</p>
<p>This is somewhat off point but I’ve just come from a top 20 (actually I don’t know this, I’m guessing, lol) college’s presentation in my area. No wonder parents and kids are frustrated! When you think about the level to which applicants are held in their quests to differentiate themselves and the complete lack of effort that these colleges put into their end, it’s utterly frustrating. Do these schools realize how identical they sound? Every one of them has the same advising system, emphasizes the number of small size classes run, promotes study abroad even offering programs run directly through the school, has an “amazing” career counseling center, offers wonderful and extensive research and internship opportunities. Oh, and they are all collegial with 600 activities and if you don’t find the one you want, you’re invited to start the club of your choosing. Then they turn to the admissions criteria and suggest that having excellent grades in rigorous courses along with high test scores, strong LORs, and extracurricular involvement will be the keys to getting in—so c’mon and apply! (So we can reject the bulk of our ever-increasing load of applicants because we’re not going to give you the full picture and explain that there are institutional priorities that will work against the overwhelming majority of all applicants.) </p>
<p>Well, I can acknowledge that there is power in a college name and that is alluring to many. I get why people look at the schools even when they are unhappy with the process. I also get the FA piece and why richest schools with most generous aid and the schools with generous merit scholarships are attractive choices. But after hearing one too many of these presentations, D is completely turned off to the big names and I get why. I guess that failure to stand out works both ways. </p>
<p>Most of us agree that colleges should have a variety of kids with a variety of interests, intended majors, EC’s, talents, personalities, SES backgrounds, etc. When are we going to divorce that variety from skin color, though? Americans are such a melting pot that skin color and ethnicity is largely a meaningless division now. How white do you have to be to be white? Is a kid white or black if one parent is black but his skin tone is very, very light? Are you Asian if one parent is Chinese and one is Caucasian? I’m white, and was born in the US. My husband always thought he was white when he lived in South America, but here he’s brown it seems. Are my kids ethnically Hispanic, even though we have almost zero S. American cultural influence in our home? Is Vanessa still Asian if she was born in China, but then adopted by Hispanic parents and raised in NYC? Even cultural and ethnic differences often dissipate quickly. By the fourth generation, does “East Asian” signify a set of cultural qualities all that distinct from what could be expected to be found in any other American of any sort? </p>
<p>awcntdb, you seem earnest and more thoughtful in your response, although I still disagree. You are focusing on the feelings of high school students! If we did that in all things, well, not exactly a group representative of mature thought and experience.</p>
<p>theGFG, you’re points are equally thought-provoking. Why hasn’t someone prominent in the asian population started their own college? If the women’s and historically black colleges are still vibrant and successful, rather than complain why not be industrious and do something about it?</p>
<p>The point being, the ives and top LACs all obviously value diversity - it is a united front. It seems that banging against the wall is futile.</p>
<p>@picktails, the Asian community has burgeoned in the U.S. in the recent past and was the fastest growing race or ethnic group as reflected in the 2012 census. As the community has grown, it has found its voice and increasingly its power. In CA, an effective group was able to forestall a state legislative initiative that would have once again allowed public universities to consider race and ethnicity in admissions. </p>
<p>Wait a minute! These institutions have a grand ole’ tradition of segregation. It’s nothing new. They are not instituting segregation; it’s in their DNA. We’re talking about a number of institutions that 40 years ago were essentially all white, all male, all upper-class, and even predominantly WASP. That’s the base point that they’re working from. As a 16-year-old girl in 1971, I could not have even contemplated enrolling in approximately half of the elite-eight because they did not accept women. (I may be off on my numbers, things were happening fast at the time…but suffice it to say that even with a near perfect ACT and 4.0 grade-point average, the schools we’re talking about were not on the radar for the daughter of high-school teachers from a rural midwestern state.) I had options and I made the best of them. So does my daughter, and so will she. Even if it does not involve an Ivy-league undergraduate education. </p>
<p>By definition, these are selective institutions. Not everyone will get in. I, personally, have fewer problems with the way that selection process works now than I have with how it worked in the past. </p>
<p>There is an active thread on the admissions forum asking about which “non-asian” ECs to add to the mix to improve Ivy/MIT/Stanford admissions chances. There you have it . . . a kid who is saying that the grades are there, they have piano and violin and a range of the usual clubs but what else will move them out of the high achieving Asian stack and into some other pile?</p>
<p>“I did not make those up statements nor ask the students to write those or ask them to put frowny faces. Those are the true reflections of how the students feel about themselves and view the process overall. I am just reading and interpreting, not creating. I know no other way to interpret how many students now view themselves. It is sad and why more people do not find it sad as well is another question in itself.”</p>
<p>I would like to point out one thing. We see approximately 60 posts on any given results thread. Okay, combine early and regular and make that 120 posts. That is 120 posts out of the thousands and thousands of applicants. I am not sure that it is a representative sample of how a given group of people think. It may speak for the group of students who are on CC think. However, this once again is only a small group of students. Plus, you are asking a student who just was accepted or rejected why that happened. They aren’t going to pause for deep reflection, but look to the surface reasons for acceptance/rejection. They may be overjoyed or very disappointed at the time; hence, the appropriate emoticon. </p>
<p>I can only speak for my son who is a URM and not for other URMs. There was absolutely NO expectation of acceptance based on the fact that he was a URM. If you could have seen him when he opened the e-mail, you would understand. My son is one of the calmest people you could ever meet. He doesn’t outwardly display emotions of either a positive or negative nature. Witnessing his pure joy and surprise at his SCEA acceptance made my heart smile. I have never seen him so flabbergasted in his life. Also, I don’t think for one second that he has any doubts about his acceptance or belonging at his university. I know that he doesn’t feel “less than” based on the fact that he is a URM on campus. </p>
<p>Also, I can’t in a million years imagine my son on CC. He was too busy getting on with life to ask other people what his chances were for getting into school etc… It is his neurotic mom who was on CC in search of some answers. BTW - I have had some very helpful answers, posts, and pms when I have posted. Thank you.</p>
<p>There have been claims that some LACs with few Asian students in Asian-sparse areas favor Asian applicants as URMs. However, that is likely because Asian students, like those of other race/ethnicity*, are sometimes hesitant to apply to colleges where there are “too few” of their own race/ethnicity.</p>
<p>*Including white students. White students appear uninterested in HBUs, no matter how well an HBU happens to match the student’s stated criteria or how much scholarship money it offers. And there may be an unspoken limit to “diversity” goals of elite colleges, in that they do not want the white percentage to get low enough that it causes some white students to hesitate to apply.</p>
<p>We say we want to be color blind as a society. We don’t like assumptions and stereotypes based on race. We don’t want our race to determine how people treat us. Yet we use race as a category in college admissions. Why? Are all whites or all blacks or all Asians or all Hispanics the same as all others in their ethnic/skin color group? No, some of each are rich, some are middle class, some are poor. Some have oppressed ancestors, and some don’t. Some are Christian, some are Jewish, some are Buddhist/Hindu/Muslim/Wiccan/atheist. Some are from the NE, some are from the Midwest, and some are from other regions or foreign countries. Some like math, some like art, some like French literature and some none of those subjects. Some are athletes, some are musicians, some are writers, and some are all three at once. Some are in IB, some have taken 14 AP’s, some 5 AP’s, and some have taken none. Some are in public schools, some are in private, and some are in religious schools. Some are brilliant, some are of average intellectual ability, and some are academically weak. None of the afore-mentioned characteristics are tied to race or can be inferred from race. So why use race as an admissions category? </p>
<p>momofmusician17, your post made me smile. When my D got into Northwestern, she was shocked. When she got into UPenn - it was omg, ■■■, etc… It is a GIFT that she was absolutely honored to receive, still doesn’t believe, and is determined not to take for granted.</p>
I guess that’s why my kids seemed to enjoy the CTCL presentations a lot more. I don’t know if those are as good as they once were — back in the day, the CTCL colleges really were small fish struggling for name recognition, often with very high admission rates. </p>
<p>sorghum: My bad. I really shouldn’t write posts when I’m running late. Poor choice of words. I should have said “a handful of blacks.” And of course many of the Asians and Indians are Americans, although that really isn’t relevant. </p>
<p>@calmom, I agree. Not just the CTCL presentations but any school that wasn’t on the popular lists. My middle D attended a prospective student weekend at one of the women’s colleges and from that point on, that was her school. It was such a different feeling. The school was very clear that we’re not for everyone but here is what we are and here is what we can offer. D came away with a strong sense of connection and new contacts with students and even professors.</p>
<p>@saintfan: If they have to ask that question (“what else will move them out of the high achieving Asian stack and into some other pile?”), it won’t work. </p>
<p>Despite the stereotypes that persist on CC, there are thousands of Asian students whose lives don’t fit the stereotype. A large number of them also have no particular interest in attending elite colleges – so that may be why they aren’t as visible on the CC chances threads (but no shortage at all of Asians attending California CSU’s and community colleges) - but the point is, if you look around, there are plenty of Asian kids doing all sorts of other things. </p>
<p>But if a kid came to me and asked how to differentiate themselves… probably the first thing that would come too mind for me is, volunteer. Get involved in the community. No shortage of opportunities, no competition to get in. Don’t do it because it looks good to elite colleges – do it in order to get out of the bubble. </p>
(And it sounds awfully familiar…says rural southern Baptist girl married to urban Eastern-European Catholic boy!)</p>
BTW - I have had some very helpful answers, posts, and pms when I have posted. Thank you.</p>