<p>Have to say that I bristle at some of the scoldings issued on this thread toward the “ambitious Asians” set on HYPSM and imploring them to lower their sights. I dunno. It just bugs me. Why can’t members of any race strive for whatever they want to in life? </p>
<p>I’m not trying to be incendiary but a lot of the posts arguing that there is no bias against Asians strike me as subtly racist. I’m very uncomfortable with the characterizations of Tiger Moms and violin-playing math drones. We don’t tolerate such characterizations for other racial groups – why is it okay to do it to Asians?</p>
<p>I guess I’m crazy. My white kid is about to enter the admissions fray and have to compete against a gazillion brilliant kids – no doubt many Asian among them – and so I should be all for any sort of policy that might help her, ie, she’s white not Asian and thus maybe not lowest on the totem pole for admission. But I don’t see it that way at all. It makes me very disgusted that the process is not more objective and yes, that pathetic and contemptible word . . . fair.</p>
<p>I’m uncomfortable with it, too; but, that is where the thread has taken us. There are posters who claim to be either Asian or South Asian who embrace the stereotype and argue simultaneously that 1) it is within their rights to both embrace the stereotype of the Tiger Mom/violin playing Math drone (who btw, also know by age 17 that they want to be investment bankers) and, 2) protest mightily when a select few universities don’t fill their seats to the brim with people matching those exact same qualities. That’s my understanding of the state of play up to this moment.</p>
<p>Many private K-12 schools use a similar, secretive, race-aware admissions procedure; (some even giving priority to applicants of a certain religion). The elites are not doing anything new or different in this regard. Why are people not similarly up in arms about those K-12 schools? They get favorable tax treatment, too.</p>
<p>^^^ Exactly. I sense a lot of subtly racist comments towards Asians here. If they were made towards any other minority it will certainly be considered racist.</p>
<p>One thing I noticed is that we tend to embrace the positive aspects of the stereotype, and rail against the negative. So several posters embrace the ‘hard working, high expectation’ aspect of the Asian stereotype as true (since these qualities are seen as virtuous) but feel then get upset when the ‘conformist, not innovative’ aspect of the stereotype is brought up.</p>
<p>It’s also very interesting in this discussion that when it comes to admissions, there is a suggestion that want to see less stereotypical Asians, but we want to see more stereotypical African Americans. From the few posts here about African American students and admissions, there is a subtle bias from some posters against middle class suburban African American students–as though that doesn’t ‘count’ in trying to create a diverse class.</p>
<p>How did you reach the conclusion that “we want to see more stereotypical [blacks]”? Examples, please?</p>
<p>This is the second time an allegation of a “subtle bias…against middle class suburban [black] students” has been raised. Again, examples, please?</p>
<p>So, here is my reasoning. URM favoritism has not to do with feeling bad for certain races or anything of that sort. It is simply that to give assistance the Feds require institutions to bring in URMs. Adcoms don’t care where they come from, wealthy AfAm doctors or the poor. They merely need enough people who’ve checked the AfAm box. Whites give more. Smart Asians demoralize whites. So choke them Asians up. Simple economic theory: keep Fed money flowing at one end, keep white giving flowing at the other.</p>
<p>I agree. I was pointing out the parallels between private K-12 admissions practices and that of private colleges, in case some people who haven’t realized it can rationalize the hypocrisy in choosing to send their kids to those K-12s on the one hand, and railing against HYPS on the other.</p>
<p>Interesting. Like this quote, from Indian Parent: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>According to Fabrizio, that there isn’t an “Asian” perspective, or “Asian” behavior, or “Asian” anything. And that it is racist to suggest such a thing.</p>
<p>I happen to know quite a few non-Jewish white and African American parents who push their kids. And many of the stereotypes of Asian parents and kids that I see on CC are written by Asian kids.</p>
<p>I think IndianParent also said that Asians don’t donate money or assimilate well. I don’t remember fabrizio getting bent out of shape over those comments.</p>
<p>I also recall IndianParent writing something to the effect that he will advise all Asian applicants to be untruthful regarding their plans for study (i.e., don’t disclose STEM interests).</p>
<p>Deep Springs is not on his list, but I think one can make a good (if not iron-clad) argument that it is the most exclusive school in the country. The application process is challenging enough to deter casual applicants, yet in recent years their admit rate has been as low as 6%. This is a two year college, so look too at where students go after DSC (16% transferred to Harvard, 13% to Chicago, 7% to Yale and 7% to Brown in the past 10 years, according to the DSC web site.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Asians are “overrepresented” at these schools in comparison to the US census data (using their share of US population as a baseline). If you look at the Berkeley or CalTech enrollments and conclude (as I think IndianParent does) that 40-50% is the Asian enrollment rate we should expect at selective schools (all of them?), then maybe Asians are “underrepresented” at these schools. I admit I do not really know, because I don’t know how many Asians apply to these places let alone their qualifications. </p>
<p>I think your bigger point is that many Asian students are in fact attracted to excellent colleges that aren’t necessarily as famous as HYP. In other words, top Asian students are not all “prestige whores”. Surely you are correct.</p>
<p>If admission officers don’t care about the poor, why do some institutions bother with programs such as Questbridge and invest considerable money and effort in outreach programs? Is it cynical lip service? </p>
<p>Does the federal government really impose minimum numbers of particular students, and if it does, what mechanism is or could be used for that purpose?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>We do know exactly the number of Asians who apply, are admitted, and enroll at Cal.</p></li>
<li><p>Looking at enrollment in such way is a fool’s errand. Enrollment is the result of several factors, namely applications volume, admission rates, and finally yield.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Question for those that claim there are several other colleges that provide an excellent education at par with HYPSM, yet have very low Asian percentage. Can you please point to me what such a college would be where the key strenght is STEM, and why the education there is just as strong as HYPSM? I am genuinely curious.</p>