are colleges racist?

[fabrizio]

<p>

So here’s the deal: if you are an Asian high school student reading this, don’t be tricked.

</p>

<p>My suggestion to Asian high school students is that if they feel suspicious of the process, they are free to decline self-identification. Otherwise, they should feel free to apply wherever they want.</p>

<p>

But don’t assume that your race alone is hurting you, just because some whiny people are “concerned.”

</p>

<p>Why discuss with me if you think I’m whining? In fact, since you believe that I’m just in a “phase,” why discuss with me at all? According to your belief, eventually one day I’ll be saying everything you’re saying to the next generation except I’ll have more credibility since I can say “I used to be like you.”</p>

<p>I don’t appreciate your Catch-22s. You don’t have to agree with me, but that doesn’t give you a right to say damned if you do, damned if you don’t. If I fit the stereotype of a trophy hunting Asian who didn’t get accepted everywhere and complained about it, I’d be a “whiner.” But I don’t fit that stereotype; I “zigged” and ended up with a 100% acceptance rate and a happy end to my senior year. I even have “skin in the game” as I legally changed my surname. Still a “whiner” according to Hunt.</p>

<p>Hey, if you feel that way, there’s an easy solution: don’t reply to my posts. Why waste time talking to a whiner? Go out and help the Asian high schoolers in your community and educate them about the process.</p>

[siserune]

<p>

Yes, I am puzzled. I will proffer purely anecdotal but very provocative stuff on this issue.</p>

<ol>
<li>At ALL the coed privates (boarding or local) I have ever been familiar within the last 15 years, the girls dominate in overall HS GPA. This is revealed by public things like class rank, shared knowledge of grades all the way through, honors, you name it. We kid about it- if my D is #20 in her class, she is likely to be, not # 10 but more like #15 in girls (with whom she will be competing/yes on many other attributes as well/ for spaces at colleges).

</li>
</ol>

<p>Yes. Females place a higher priority on schoolwork.</p>

<p>

I do not know if the GPA of just the Math or Science or M/S courses would reveal the same pattern or something different…

</p>

<p>Studies show that high grades in upper-level math/science classes in college are basically unattainable without high enough math SAT (and no such cutoff was found in the upper humanities classes, where hard work is more effective). Something like that might exist in high school, but the material is simpler, so who knows.</p>

<p>

3. Yes, this is true: the boys who are in the upper 'tiles by HS GPA are mostly Asian.

</p>

<p>The Asian pattern is similar to that of females. Asians rate higher than whites on all measures of conscientiousness (with the effects again seen in rates of graduation, literacy, savings, divorce, criminality, college attendance etc etc). Dornbusch’s studies in the SF Bay Area in the 1970-80’s showed Asians spending <em>twice</em> as many hours on homework during their schooling, compared to whites. The gender effect was not as strong. Asian females combine both effects.</p>

<p>

The feeling we parents of girls have is that the deck is stacked against girls on the GPA front- they are relatively mature, focused, organized, serious about school-work (at least during HS!), so their GPA bar is higher than it is for boys.

</p>

<p>I don’t know if there is a difference in the GPA standard, but because the sexes have different academic behavior, GPA is less of a cognitive indicator for a girl than a boy. On average, all else being equal, a girl with a 3.92 GPA will be somewhat less capable than a boy with the exact same transcript, because the girl (on average) will, among other differences, have invested more effort in attaining those grades. A 750 math SAT might be more meaningful for a girl than a boy, not because it’s a higher percentile for females than for males, but because girls will tend to perform better, even in math classes, than their math scores imply. As a predictor of academic performance or ability, grades mean less for females than for males.</p>

<p>Again, the same considerations apply to predicting performance for Asians vs whites. A group or individual that strives harder will get better absolute results but any given credential will be diluted in predictive value. This is an inescapable mathematical phenomenon and it applies to all groups. But it is most visible in E.Asians because of the large immigrant numbers and the degree of striving compared to most other groups.</p>

[Professor101]

<p>

Siserune1. Stanford is next door to the equivalent, in terms of Asian enrollment, of 5-6 Ivy League schools. Its name is UC Berkeley.

That’s true, a lot Stanford rejects,of course, because Stanford don’t want 30% Asian.</p>

[Lemaitre1]

<p>“One other possible for the high scores in Ma (to wit also true for PAST/NMS cut-offs) could be the presence of a good number of excellent Boarding Schools.
To wit again, the NMS cut-off in 2010 for New England BS was based on the MA score, so they are the bar - the highest in the country.”</p>

<p>"Quote:
For those not familiar with the Bay State, the White population of Massachusetts is overwhelmingly made up of individuals of Irish, Italian and Portugese descent.
hmm … I beleive that. In addition there are a bunch of folks from a scattering of ethnic groups that do share a relgious heritage that might help explain those high test scores … MA has one of the highest concentrations of Jews in the US; especially the greater Boston area.</p>

<p>The contribution of these two groups to the overall strong showing of Massachusetts is not likely to be significant. The groups tested were 4th and 8th graders who are generally not likely to be at boarding schools. Jews make up only 4% of the population of Massachusetts, much less than the 9% of New York state’s population made up by Jews but Mass Whites still outscore New York state Whites and by a particularly wide margin in Math. The main contribution to the superior academic achievement of Massachusetts children is most likely being made by ethnic Irish, Italian and Portugese children and the only thing these groups seem to have in common is being predominantly Roman Catholic and therefore more likely to attend Catholic schools. </p>

<p>If this is actually the case it could be evidence that their are effective ways to boost academic achievement in the K-12 setting that could contribute to solving the problem of the achievement gap between Asians and URMs which would lessen the need for and tension over Affirmative Action.</p>

[Professor101]

<p>

siserune -3. Stanford computer science and electrical engineering is much harder to get into than other departments, but this field attracts relatively more Asians, so it will drive down the admission rate. (ST*M)

What happen to the myth that Asian are good at STEM? Do Asians compete among themselves only in Stanford?</p>

[siserune]

<p><a href=“Prof101%20:”>quote</a> </p>

<p>Go ahead post the CDS sources for 2010-2011 Asian Freshmen percents for Stanford and Princeton. The numbers are 16% and 18%.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Think harder. The Asian-to-white ratio is much higher for Stanford than Princeton. Also tell us the 4-year percentage of Asians instead of the one-year numbers that fluctuate more.</p>

<p>

I am always amused that people count “race not specified” or multi-racial as Asian.

</p>

<p>SOME of them are Asian. You are welcome to specify how the proportion of Asian non-responders should be estimated, but at Stanford the number of “not specified” is far higher than at Princeton. </p>

<p>Do you have answers to the other six items? (Edit: I see you are quoting them, but not exactly “answering”. Great stuff here on the internet!)</p>

[sm74]

<p>texaspg-absent any other way to generalize about the population by race of strong academic students I used ap scores of 5 as a substitute. I recognize colleges don’t care about ap’s but thats a whole nother issue that fits into what has been going on with the Harvard Summer Institute for College Admissions. Looking at the names of nmsf kids in our State and the ratio is about 5 to 1 white to asian-again not scientific but in my mind does support the premise that unhooked whites have the toughest time of all. What we heard pretty clearly was that if you really want your kid to go to HYPS then find a sport.</p>

[Professor101]

<p>

siserune 4. Stanford has stronger legacy and athletic preferences, to the detriment of Asian acceptance numbers. It is not bound by Ivy League recruiting limits.</p>

<ol>
<li>Asians in the Bay Area are the most concentrated in the USA and therefore most disadvantaged by clustering effects.

Make sense. Neverthless, the end result is: Asians got discriminated intentionally or unintentionally at Stanford.</li>
</ol>

[mokusatsu]

<p>

Does anyone know whether that is even a common practice? If being Asian is not a “hook” (and, other than for instirutional research purposes) why would a college even bother labeling the application folder? This seems like one of those half-truths that gets spun around a mega-length thread like this and just gets swept up with the rest of the misinformation.

They don’t put a scarlet “A” on the folder?</p>

[texaspg]

<p>sm74 - I understand your measure but I am only pointing out that since it is not actually considered during the admission process, it may not truly be reflective. National merit is another area I am doubtful of since it seems to play almost no role in admissions unless you are applying to a school that is outside of top 20 or one that truly is interested in admitting NMSFs and gives them merit based money like USC. The only thing it seems to be useful for is to get junk mail when you flag the box that says I want colleges to contact me.<br>
I agree with you on the sport part except for Stanford where they require you to be really good. We have a local elite private school that does nt admit any kids who don’t have an inclination for at least one sport. They send a lot of kids to Ivies and usually have about 1/3rd to 1/4th of graduating class being listed under NMSF. They seem to send kids through a combination of academics and athletics to the Ivies.</p>

[Hunt]

<p>

Hey, if you feel that way, there’s an easy solution: don’t reply to my posts. Why waste time talking to a whiner? Go out and help the Asian high schoolers in your community and educate them about the process.

No thanks. I’m hoping you’ll take your ball and go home again, as you said you were doing earlier in the thread when the heat on you to answer questions got too intense. Besides, if there’s nobody here to point out what’s wrong with what you’re saying, some kids reading this might be tricked, and I don’t think that would be a good thing at all.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

…when the heat on you to answer questions got too intense.

</p>

<p>If there’s any question you feel I’ve left unanswered, let’s have at it. I have already addressed your “why do you feel this way?” numerous times, though you don’t like my answer. (You don’t have to.) I’ve also addressed your STEM argument, and I’ve said that I do NOT want to read any more posts from you claiming that I haven’t addressed it.</p>

<p>As for you, Hunt, care to explain your comment about Jews’ “learning to speak English really well”? I think this is the third time I’ve asked you.</p>

<p>

Besides, if there’s nobody here to point out what’s wrong with what you’re saying, some kids reading this might be tricked, and I don’t think that would be a good thing at all.

</p>

<p>You can say whatever you like. My advice to Asian high schoolers is that if for whatever reason they feel suspicious of the process, they can always decline to self-identify. If you have anything against that suggestion, lay it out.</p>

[Professor101]

<p>

I’m hoping you’ll take your ball and go home again, as you said you were doing earlier in the thread when the heat on you to answer questions got too intense. Besides, if there’s nobody here to point out what’s wrong with what you’re saying, some kids reading this might be tricked, and I don’t think that would be a good thing at all.

I don’t think Roger Dooley would be happy :). I think that kids are smarter than what we give them credits for.</p>

[performersmom]

<p>siserune-
Thanks for sharing this research data about the differences in academic and testing performance/development and aptitude across different segments of the population. I do not know what your sources are- is there a lot of research about all this?</p>

<p>IMPORTANTLY, is this research used by colleges and known/applied in their admissions strategies? Do you see it as being in line with admissions practices?</p>

<p>More to the point of this thread, do you think that Affirmative Action is somehow justified or necessary based on this research? How do Asians test? Perform in college? Later? How about Hispanics, African Americans and Native Americans?
Do you believe there is research that supports that GPA or SAT or ACT are not valid for certain races? certain socio-economic groups?</p>

<p>Has any research been done to see if privileged Hispanics (by $, time in US, good schools, stable home & community, college- ed parents, etc…)Native Americans, African Americans perform significantly better on SAT’s? Or that the SAT does predict future success in these circumstances?</p>

<p>Has research shown exactly which areas of privilege are the better predictors of success : economic, emotional stability/ self-esteem, family life, community, academic preparation, involvement in activities outside of the classroom, leadership, what have you… And conversely, when lacking , which really causes underperformance in college or later?</p>

<p>I am going back to these basic questions, because I was not aware how much research there may be out there about how disadvantaged students perform, and how applicants may be fairly and accurately judged and sliced into groupings.</p>

<p>It is interesting to see if “grouping” by researchers is proving or disproving stereotypes about “groups”, and whether these “groups” need to be re-defined based on the research results.</p>

<p>On a more personal note, do you believe it is if fair to discount the GPA of say a girl or an Asian for “over-performing”, meaning for working hard to the point of exceeding the predictive value of the HS measures?</p>

<p>Thanks for analyzing and taking the time to share the data.</p>

[epiphany]

<p>

That’s true, a lot Stanford rejects,of course, because Stanford don’t want 30% Asian.

</p>

<p>Um, no. A lot of Berkeley applications and acceptances, because so many of those applicants do not qualify for the kind of need-based aid that would make Stanford irresistible if they were accepted, and Berkeley is considered a high-quality bargain when everything, including school name, finances, etc., is weighed. Some of those Asian acceptees are also Regents’ awards, which offers them an honor, an honorarium, and other perks. </p>

<p>Some Asians at Berkeley have been accepted by Stanford, but turn S down. Others have not been accepted, and are happy to go to Berkeley. Others don’t even apply. And if they’re Korean, they have (and their family has) been, in the words of one CC’er to me, “worshipping at the temple of UC Berkeley in Korea their whole lives.”</p>

[mathmom]

<p>

I beleive that. In addition there are a bunch of folks from a scattering of ethnic groups that do share a relgious heritage that might help explain those high test scores … MA has one of the highest concentrations of Jews in the US; especially the greater Boston area.

And here I always thought it was the high proportion of descendents of the Mayflower crew and kids who attended St. Grottlesex that explained Massachusetts higher scores. ;)</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Some Asians at Berkeley have been accepted by Stanford, but turn S down.

</p>

<p>Fwiw, consider the total number of students who turn down Stanford for Cal from ALL races combined, the number of Asians must be ridiculously small. We are talking about SINGLE DIGIT here! </p>

<p>Inasmuch as there is a large overlap in applications at Stanford and Cal, the overlap of admission is a lot smaller (26% of admitted students) and almost all students accepted at both Cal and Stanford do select Stanford. Only a small handful of students does select Cal every year. Among schools that “capture” Stanford admits through cross-acceptances, Cal is not in the top twenty.</p>

<p>

… Shaw turned to other universities, telling faculty 26 percent of students admitted to the Class of 2014 also were admitted to UC-Berkeley; 21 percent to UC-Los Angeles; 18 percent to Princeton; 17 percent to Harvard; 15 percent to Yale; 13 percent to UC-San Diego; 14 percent to Duke; and 13 percent to M.I.T.</p>

<p>Of the ’14 admits who did not enroll at Stanford, 32 percent chose Harvard; 16 percent, Yale; 14 percent, Princeton; and 13 percent, M.I.T. UC-Berkeley was not among the top 20 schools those students chose.

</p>

[texaspg]

<p>I remember back in 1986 when Stanford and Berkeley were both very close to each other in the top 10 schools. Current students don’t seem to consider them on equal footing any more if 20 schools were considered above UCB when people declined Stanford.</p>

[epiphany]

<p>xiggi, I did say “some,” and I meant it quite literally. I didn’t claim that it was a lot. However, it is also true that an acceptance to Berkeley (and rejection or waitlist from Stanford) is not necessarily seen as a crushing blow and some huge step down; it just isn’t seen that way for most who end up at Berkeley. And there are “some,” and again I mean this literally – not as in “a lot,” who do not apply to Stanford at all for various reasons, and naturally that includes “locals” of all backgrounds. (Who apply to Ivies + Berkeley, from CA, but not to Stanford. There are actually a fair number of those.)</p>

[texaspg]

<p>A kid I know living 4 miles from Stanford applied to Columbia ED last year (2010) and got in. A single application was it for the college season.</p>