<p>I agree with xiggi on Post 2014. Esphenshade & Co. never proved that Asian admits “had” to have a >200 difference vs. other admits. The study showed that they had them. Nothing about “must have.” When you offer something extra to the buyer in a Buyer’s Market, the buyer will say ‘Thank you, I think I’ll take that as well.’ (Because I can.)</p>
<p>A relative of mine recently sold a major mansion worth a considerable sum, to a famous executive of a company that has become a verb. This relative of mine had 3 offers on the house: (1) a contingency offer (must add ____ improvement or ____ approval for improvement of already-fantastic abode, for me to agree to buy); (2) an offer requiring a loan; (3) a cash offer from above executive. Guess which offer my relative accepted. The offer was more than was “required”; it was simply more ideal. </p>
<p>And if you live in Washington, D.C., or in Seattle, or in the SF Bay Area, you will face stiff employment competition when searching for jobs, due to a highly educated local population. Ads are posted which “require” a Master’s Degree as the qualification, and clearly the stated duties would not entail more knowledge than a Master’s represents (maybe not even a Bachelor’s in many cases). But the company hiring knows there are plenty of local Master’s Degree holders in the area, so they specify this educational level. Turns out, there are plenty of unemployed Ph.D’s in the area as well. Assuming the job would not bore a Ph.D., the company hires the Ph.D, because it can. It never asked for a Ph.D., but Ph.D’s showed up at their doorstep.</p>
<p>What negative attention does Asian overrepresentation generate? My goodness, on this thread, it’s all about being Asians being UNDERrepresented relative to what they “should” or “would” be at, if URM’s didn’t get some preferences.</p>
<p>Very insightful observation. The power relations can also be used to explain why Stanford is limiting the number of Asian students. The Stanford elites don’t want it to become another Caltech or Berkeley where the balance of power has shifted.</p>
<p>I have now answered your outbursts several times. You can drop all that non sequitur and illogism nonsense! </p>
<p>I addressed this part of your post:</p>
<p>“I definitely agree with the fact that at many, many universities and colleges – public and private, I will add – there is a blatantly inaccurate assumption that only blacks and hispanics are poor. I strongly disapprove of such scholarship policies. Plenty of southeast Asians, plenty of whites, some recent immigrants (but U.S. citizens) from mainland China, some from India, are as poor as any black or hispanic applying. But they are shut out from scholarship consideration.” </p>
<p>The quoted text states that schools are relying on “a blatantly inaccurate assumption that only blacks and hispanics are poor” and that “plenty of southeast Asians, plenty of whites, some recent immigrants (but U.S. citizens) from mainland China, some from India, are shut out from scholarship consideration.”</p>
<p>The example of the programs sponsored by Questbridge indicates that schools not only are aware that not only blacks and hispanics are poor but also that such schools do NOT shut out students from other races from programs such as the College Match.</p>
<p>Perhaps you wanted to make a distinction between need-based aid and merit scholarships, but this was not clear by reading the post I quoted.</p>
<p>Yes, xiggi, I realize that you were (like me in my later post) referring to non-racially based scholarships. But you were not referring to college-specific scholarships, which I was. That’s all I’m saying here. It’s confusing when posters fail to explain why they’re using one quote to refer to something completely out of context from that quote. (Confusing because if the response objects to the quote, but objects to a different context of that poster’s statement, then quoting that poster is inappropriate, as it doesn’t relate to the quoted poster’s argument whatsoever.)</p>
<p>No. You still don’t get it. This is maybe the 4th, 5th time now, I’ve explained it? Colleges offering separate, merit-based non-Questbridge scholarships, for high-achieving URM’s, not for ORM’s or white Anglos. These are not funneled through/with QB whatsoever.</p>
<p>Since some on this thread are asking about specific scholarships targetted towards URM students, I thought I’d point out that the University of Pittsburgh offers the Helen Faison scholarship, which is a full-ride merit scholarship, to 5 URM students each year. Two to three times as many students each year (including some URM students) receive the full-ride Chancellor’s Scholarship and (I think) a handful of other full-ride scholarships open to students meeting other criteria (such as enrollment in engineering). Many, many additional students receive merit money up to full tuition, so the Faison scholarships are a minority of the scholarships offered at Pitt. Merit money at Pitt is not given out automatically for meeting a specific threshhold, as many on the Pitt forum have noted, and some on that forum have suspected that URM students can get undesignated merit funds (not Faison scholarships) with lower stats than required from others. </p>
<p>I don’t know how many other schools that are not among the elite schools discussed in this thread offer these types of scholarships, but I thought I’d just point this out.</p>
<p>shrinkrap - The ‘textureless drone’ dominated STEM fields seem to have a lot of minority scholarships. I suspect that if you google STEM, minorities, and any university name, you will find something. Without university name, you end up with 100s of pages.</p>
<p>I have look at a LOT of those without results. The first three are full of dead links; many are not blacks only</p>
<p>From the second link
Scholarship Programs
African American Scholarships
Asian Scholarships
Hispanic Scholarships
Interracial Scholarships
LGBTQ Scholarships
Native American Scholarships
White Male Scholarships
Women Scholarships</p>
<p>or also require need, but thanks. And I agree I the STEM ones look promising, at least on the grad level.</p>
<p>i.e. Minority Medical Student Award Program</p>
<p>The Minority Medical Student Award Program (MMSAP) is an 8- to 12-week research experience for students from the United States and Canada in their early years of medical school. </p>
<p>For the purposes of this program, minority is defined as those groups that ASH has determined to be underrepresented in the field of hematology related to biomedical, behavioral, clinical, or social science research. This definition includes, but is not limited to, racial/ethnic minorities and persons from disadvantaged socioeconomic groups. Thus, applicants must self-identify, and participants are drawn from this pool.</p>
<p>Applicants must be enrolled in MD, DO, or MD/PhD medical school programs and be citizens or permanent residents of the United States or Canada.</p>
<p>There is a ridiculous (for the lack of a better term) amount of encouragement for women and minorities (I can see why one of our posters complained) to enter and reach the pinnacles of STEM fields. 30k for getting a masters is real money through LSAMP and Ph.D.s are usually paid for anyway through research scholarships. So if the AA folks want to reach the promised land, get them to the STEM!</p>
<p>Some colleges do have close to full rides for undergrads in STEM. You really have to say, this is the college I am interested and start asking what is available. The ones I googled are state schools which have much lower tuition.</p>
<p>Though I still have trouble understanding [your</a> post](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/10455458-post38.html]your”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/10455458-post38.html) that I tried to poke fun at. But your lack of understanding of statistics was still breathtaking. You think that by piling more events on top of each other and come out with a small number would make your argument more convincing, unfortunately it just make you look silly. (I’ll ignore your selectively picking data from 7 out of the 25 years here. )</p>
<p>Here is an example for you:
What is the odds that defending champion Nadal will win this years Wimbledon? Most people will say better than 1/128 (fans of Fedderer and Djokovic may disagree). But what is odds of Nadal beating Fedderer in the final? that would be about 1/128<em>1/64. And what if Fedderer beating Djokovic in semi-final, but losing to Nadal in the final: 1/128</em>1/64*1/32, which is an odds of less than 4 in a million. </p>
<p>The small probability (in a large sampling space) does not means that Nadal’s winning is any less likely.</p>
<p>sewhappy - very impressive academics. I know an Asian kid with similar stats 2400, 36, 3 800s, 3rd in class (presidential scholar, has been visiting white house last three years) who got into HPSCPenn, NU HPME, and waitlisted at Yale. Was voted homecoming king although he never played any sports for school (suburban competitive class of 800+ with great sports teams), summer research before senior year, eagle scout etc.</p>
<p>It may be hard to believe for some but if a kid can score 2400, they tend to write great essays too. Test taking skills usually also reflect quite well in writing skills.</p>