<p>Can’t really make an opinion on this (even though I’m Asian-American myself). The only thing I can state is that there is a lot of pressure that exists (but of course, this pressure does exist in other cultures also)</p>
<p>This thread’s twin is over in college admissions and it is getting a lengthy discussion there. I find it telling in itself that the only individual school’s forum in which the OP posted this thread is Harvard. </p>
<p>I agree for Asian American the competition is harder to get into ivy than UC schools. But the competition is not academic wise, it’s the social and leadership. That’s what Ivy schools also look for other than GPA. How many Asian kids are leaders and willing to spend a lot of time to do volunteer in high school. Most of the Asian parents just push their kids to do math/physics competition, get high score in SAT stuff. I know a kid from my son’s school, SAT1 got 2300, his parents still want him to take one more time. Because several other kids get 2400.</p>
<p>I think other than blame the schools, we should also look at ourselves what we did wrong. Why do people like to send kids to Ivy and top tier school? Because their graduates are more successful, but why they are more successful? Because when the school select kids, they have different standard, they pick leaders and read their essay to look for their passion, not only by look at their score. </p>
<p>If Harvard like UC have 50% Asian kids, I believe Harvard would not be Harvard. Asian parents would not value Harvard differently, they would spend $32000/yr to send their kids to UC, rather than spending $52000/yr to Ivy.</p>
<p>Interesting idea to change your Asian name to “game” the system. Do you think this is worth doing? I hate to see discrimination, but yet, staying true to self is important as well.</p>
<p>Comparing the acceptance rates for Asian Americans at ivies to state schools in California is ridiculous. California has a much high proportion of Asian Americans than the US as a whole and the UCs’ student bodies are predominantly Californians. According to the article above, Berkeley is 40% Asian American while Harvard accepted 17.8% this year. But California is 12.8% Asian American while the US is only 4.8%. Therefore UCB Asian Americans are over-represented by a factor of 3.125 (40%/12.8%) while H Asian Americans are over-represented by a factor of 3.708 (17.8%/4.8%). Certainly a better analysis than this can be done, but these arguments are a lot more heat than light.</p>
<p>This should be posted in thread of all the Ivy League/Top School sections so that we can get a variety of opinions. I believe there should only be economic affirmative action. Race shouldn’t be considered, but instead only the economic status of an applicant. The amount of effort that a student put in relevant to his/her economic status is the best way imo.</p>
<p>One thing doesn’t make sense to me however, why is it fine that 40-45% of the people at a college can be white, but not that many can be asian?</p>
<p>This is ridiculous. Admissions should not be punishing kids for having a high-achieving cultural background. Also, “poor little Asians”, really?! That’s every bit as bad as saying that other minorites (blacks, hispanics, etc.) will drag down a school’s standards. And saying that Asians can’t demonstrate leadership is also blatantly false. The one Japanese kid in my school’s senior class last year was also debate captain, and guess what? He’s going to Berkeley!</p>