<p>
</p>
<p>But you said that nothing would change under my system, no? So why isn’t my system also similarly equitable? This is the part I don’t understand.</p>
<p>I do kind of tend to agree with the general idea that there are a bunch of great kids of all races at the top. Once they are taken, the rest of the kids are above average, like Lake Wobegon. </p>
<p>With overlap of admissions to several schools for some of the best kids, it is hard to determine the credentials of all the other kids are that are getting rejected.</p>
<p>performersmom - I agree the financial aid is a nightmare but if you ignore Harvard and Princeton, rest seem to cut off aid at 80-90k of income.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Who knows? But as long as every Asian kid gets to go to a college that is justified by merit alone, I am happy.</p>
<p>I was a T.A for several years at a top school. Over the years about 400 students signed up for my classes (some of the classes were compulsory classes for the major, others were electives which the student decides whether to take or not. The electives were junior level classes which required a lot of prerequisite). </p>
<p>The grade distribution for Asians, Whites, Blacks and Latinos were all over the place. I can speculate that the Asians accepted to this school, on average, will have higher SAT scores than the rest , so you might think that their grade distribution will cluster at the top, but that was not so. In fact, a lot of them were close to the mean, and some were at the bottom. There were some who did very well, but they were not any different from the top White, Black or Latino performers. </p>
<p>Asians have been graduating from top universities in larger numbers over the last twenty years, but their share of professors is very small. For some reason I have a feeling that they are perhaps good test takers but are not innately better. </p>
<p>(Most of the Latinos and Blacks who took my elective classes were clustered at the top of the class, but the sample is small, for some reason not a lot of them took my section, so you can’t infer much from this)</p>
<p>Note: I don’t support race based affirmative action. I don’t see what kind of “diversity” a rich Black student who attended collegiate and lives in the Upper East Side adds to the ‘flavor” of the college. I will rather give a break to the Asian kid from Chinatown who attends Bronx Science; even if he has slightly lower scores.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bingo! It is all about hard work.</p>
<p>I mean, guys, let’s get real here. Do you really think Amy Chua’s kids were born with more talent that the other kids around them? May be, but odds of that are low. It was Amy Chua’s relentless driving that enabled them to be high achievers.</p>
<p>Tega must be the coolest new member on CC! I am curious what mess up on the database provided 4 billion + posts to Tega.</p>
<p>tega
New Member</p>
<p>Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,294,967,295</p>
<p>
Why is it unfair? The new criteria are objective criteria that will show if an applicant has “merit.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that expressing your views on this issue for a few more days might help you understand the positions of the adcoms a lot more! As remarkable as 99 percent perspiration is, one should realize that the admissions to the most selective schools is not the just reward for exceptional … perspiration. This is why so many who might disagree with you will point toward misguided expectations. </p>
<p>Take a good look at what you have suggested herein. “Please give me the punch list of achievements I need to follow, and I will do so to … perfection.” This is the type of expectation that has created so many failed dreams for Asians when the “formula” stopped working for the Stepford children.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why are moving goalposts in the middle of the game wrong?</p>
<p>“Tega must be the coolest new member on CC! I am curious what mess up on the database provided 4 billion + posts to Tega.”</p>
<p>It’s a database glitch that the shows the highest 32 bit binary…
11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 = 4,294,967,295.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know you always have a little trouble not asking another question but the point was to Let IP know that Asians are not being accepted at the near 50% level at the top UC’s. He is confusing his statistics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well if many Asian’s ALL apply in high numbers to the same school, here in CA Berkeley is a real favorite (parents wouldn’t be too ashamed), and they take 25% of them they will overwhelm the incoming class. There are many white students that could compete with these Asians that choose not to apply (Non Asian parents are not as particular about where their children apply).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How can it be the same when according to IP Asian parents are so much more superior (Or should I say IP is)?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But what about the social achievement gap? I don’t think non Asian parents are that impressed with tiger parents and the outcome of this type of parenting. I’d be interested in the mental health of these tigered kids (I suspect a lot of anxiety and depression)</p>
<p>Xiggi, I know that AdComs are trying to something else. I also have no expectations of AdComs, nor will I be disappointed, as I do not have a horse in the race. However, I would appreciate if you can explain why my system is not preferable to the current one. What you have done so far is state that AdComs find their system preferable to mine. I am not surprised, as if they didn’t they wouldn’t have followed their system. That’s a no-brainer.</p>
<p>What I am trying to understand is the root cause for the preference. It can’t be having a quota for URMs, as my system has that too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Isn’t the share of Asians in the UCs close to 50%?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a very valid point. But we are not talking of social achievement here. We are talking of college admissions.</p>
<p>Incidentally, I didn’t know that social achievement for Asian kids was lower. Is that true?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But they don’t HAVE to take 25% of them. That was my point. To make it more clear, suppose that 15,000 Asians applied. All but two had SAT scores of 600/2400, 2.0 GPAs, incoherent essays, and no extracurriculars. The remaining two have applications good enough to make them competitive at any elite institution they apply to. Would the average acceptance rate for Asians still be 25%?</p>
<p>And for someone who extols “diversity,” your post is replete with stereotypes about Asians! Since you’re going to Berkeley in the Fall, do me a favor and actually get to know some real-life “Asians.”</p>
<p>IP, I am not sure if I can make my opinion on this issue more clearer. Again, I believe we need to preserve a system of preferences for URM, and I believe that the top privates have been trying to just do that. I have used the idea that maintaining the impossible dream is crucial for the generations to come. I have explained (or expressed the view) that making systemic changes in our schools is also essential. </p>
<p>In so many words, I think that we ought to have a representation of URM in our top schools, even it reduces the numbers of spots for other races. </p>
<p>Perhaps, my position is utterly simplistic, but I do not think I would make it better by quoting from a great number of social scientists who have explored this issue in the past. </p>
<p>Lastly, I do believe the adcoms are doing their very best to build the best classes of freshmen.</p>
<p>xiggi, I reserved 25% spots for URMs in my model. But you don’t seem to be too happy about it. Why not?</p>
<p>
Do you want to choose students with “merit”, or students who are best at playing games?</p>
<p>Sorry if I used inappropriate words of social achievement gap (funny how Fab never notices if Asians are stereotyped positively). I am not talking about all Asian’s (only the tigered ones IP seems so interested in). Anyway, I looked it up and was easily able to find that tigered Asian’s do tend to suffer:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seems to me there is a communication problem between the tigered and their parents. I guess I should have said mental health achievement gap.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But non Tiger parents are not willing to to look at college admissions in a vacuum. There is an entire student who is applying to college, not just someone who has perfected the punch list. Elite colleges are also sending this message, the whole person not just their SAT scores. .</p>
<p>I found this kind of interesting, seems a lot like what I’ve been reading from IP (including the 3 languages-LOL)
</p>