<p>would Stanford consider Assyrians as Under Represented Minorities?
[Assyrian</a> people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_people]Assyrian”>Assyrian people - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>No, Assyrians would be considered “White” (Europe, Middle East, Africa). I had never heard of people still calling themselves Assyrian; I’m glad I know now.</p>
<p>then how do the colleges (Stanford particularly) define “Under Represented Minorities”?</p>
<p>if it’s “racial and ethnic minority” ([STANFORD</a> Magazine: January/February 2008 > Farm Report > News > Graduate Students](<a href=“Page Not Found”>Page Not Found)) then I don’t think you could find any race more minor that Assyrian! am I wrong my friend?</p>
<p>this link (<a href=“https://wasc.stanford.edu/files/appendix/DepartmentProfiles.pdf[/url]”>https://wasc.stanford.edu/files/appendix/DepartmentProfiles.pdf</a>) also says: “Under‐represented minorities (URM) include all non‐Asian minorities.”
which seems to include middle eastern racial minorities</p>
<p>They consider those from the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe to be “White”. “Under Represented Minorities” would be African-Americans, Hispanic people, and Native Americans.</p>
<p>I’m not saying this is right or wrong, I’m just telling you what the policy is.</p>
<p>I thought it was well-known that Yossarian was the last of the Assyrians.</p>
<p>He’s actually an Armenian that likes saying he’s Assyrian.</p>
<p>I’m Assyrian too! Glad to hear im not the only one a little confused with putting my ethnicity on college apps. And no AnythingToSay, Armenian’s are quite different from Assyrians, one of the oldest civilizations to date.</p>
<p>But I do believe we are considered “white”, in which Middle Eastern is a sub-category, which sucks because there are only like 3 million of us in the entire world…</p>
<p>What about me? I’m a white South AFrican. USC put me down (their choice not mine) that i was white and african american because they said in their eyes I am. I’m going to put down “other” on my app and explain myself.</p>
<p>A white South African is white. To put anything else will make people think ill of you.</p>
<p>Really now? Because University of Michigan Professors in Anthropology says elsewise. Also, all my “black” friends all agree that i’m african american, while they’re simply black.</p>
<p>Shapeera101; for some other college apps, I chose my ethnicity as: white, others; so I could specify that I’m of Assyrian descend. I don’t want admission officers to count me same as Arabs and other middle easterns. blending ourselves with other middle easterns won’t emphasize how “minor” our race and culture is.</p>
<p>Here are definitions used the the U.S. Census. Deviate from these if you like, but many people will think you are using deception if you do:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In other words, a white South African is white, just as a white person who grew up in India is white, a Chinese person who grew up in England is Asian, and a Native American person who grew up in Japan is still a Native American.</p>
<p>But my roots are African. There is a new ethnic group emerging of White AFricans. I’m not a British person living in South AFrica. I’m a pure South AFrican, my family has been there for a long long time. I’m putting down “white and other”. So what if you’re Russian?</p>
<p>There are zillions of threads about this. There is no “neutral”, ahistorical logic behind the definition of under-represented minorities, and (at least for the moment) there are no slots open for new minorities to qualify. It means Black, Hispanic, and Native American (I think including native Polynesians from Hawaii and Guam). It doesn’t mean White, Arab, or Berber Africans. It doesn’t mean Laplanders, Ainu, Meo, or any of hundreds of other tiny, identifiable ethnic groups. It doesn’t mean people whose historical suffering and disadvantage rivals anything that happened to Blacks or Native Americans here, including but not limited to all the various Dalits.</p>
<p>It does mean the groups whose oppression by the majority has been central to American history, who were subject to legally enforced discrimination in most of this nation for a good part of its history, and whose communities are thought by many to still suffer from the consequences of that historical discrimination. Some groups that also suffered legal discrimination, like the Irish and Chinese, have entered the mainstream enough that they are far from “underrepresented”.</p>
<p>Anyway, the point is that it’s a specific political/historical set of groups, not a set of criteria that ethnic minorities worldwide may or may not meet.</p>
<p>That said, although no one is going to count Assyrians in they URM statistics or check to make certain they have admitted enough Assyrians, I’m certain that at Stanford and elsewhere they will consider Assyrian ethnic identification as an interesting aspect of an applicant’s personality, and something worthwhile and a bit rare that that applicant can contribute to the university community. So it’s something of a plus. (Except probably at Michigan, where they probably see a ton of them. There may only be 3 million Assyrians in the world, but I’ll bet there are dozens in the Michigan and MSU applicant pools every year.)</p>
<p>Superb post, JHS. Maybe now more prospective applicants will understand the reasons why only specific racial/ethnic groups are intended to benefit from the affirmative action “hook”–it was designed to help rectify, in some small measure, a history of institutionalized discrimination against those specific groups in this country. Your post also helps clarify the important distinction between an admissions hook, which can give an applicant a significant boost in the process, and a mere “tip”, which might be a slight help to a student when compared to another who is equally qualified in all respects. Unusual ethic background falls in the latter category, at least at colleges that want to maximize diversity in the broadest (not only political) sense. Stanford is certainly among those colleges. I’m constantly amazed at the breadth of representation here.</p>
<p>
I’m just warning you that if you do this, a lot of Americans will think you’re a fraud. It won’t help you in the slightest, and it may well hurt you.</p>
<p>Why do you write AFrican, with a capital F? You’ve been consistent with it, so it must mean something, but I don’t know what. </p>
<p>And in this country, being white South African is probably something of a disadvantage–many people here would identify white South Africans as the originators, and defenders, of apartheid. I am not implying that that is true of you, but remarking on an association that might be made, since that is what most Americans think they know about South Africa.</p>
<p>
Right. In other words, white South Africans are among the very last people who should try to suggest that they deserve to be grouped with African-Americans.</p>
<p>I intend to simply put down white, and somewhere put that i’m south african too. I know i won’t be a URM, but I’m sure colleges will appreciate the fact that i’m foreign.</p>
<p>And I find that very offensive that you would think such a thing Mary. Who started the Civil War? White people if I recall. I’m not sure where you live, but people are very receptive to the fact that I’m from South Africa. USC loved the fact that i’m foreign. I even live in the South, and people are completely cool about it. </p>
<p>Also if you know yourhistory, the Apartheid ended around 1993. I was born in 93. Also notice that South Africa is “the rainbow” nation. I would say that the racial situation there is a lot more relaxed than the a lot of places in the US. It was the SA government who supported Apartheid. Most whites did not.</p>
<p>I have been labeled white african american not by myself, but by my black friends. As I said, i won’t put it down, but just pointing that out. </p>
<p>And no, i have carpal tunnel so i often capitlize the first two letters by mistake when capitalizing a word.</p>